Skip to main content

Full text of "1990 Westfield River Survey : water quality data, wastewater discharge data, water quality analysis"






v,4v>, M: i ; \j\1 : '-/ r m 



UMASS/AMHERST 




315Dbb01btibT5flb 



1990 WESTFIELD RIVER SURVEY 

WATER QUALITY DATA 
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE DATA 
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS 



MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 
TECHNICAL SERVICES BRANCH 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 
SUSAN F. TIERNEY, SECRETARY 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
DANIEL S. GREENBAUM, COMMISSIONER 

DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 
BRIAN M. DONAHOE, DIRECTOR 




<i r- 






Publication No. 16,906-86-25-7-91-C.R. 
Approved by: David M. Thomas, Acting Purchasing Agent 



NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY 



LIMITED COPIES OF THIS REPORT ARE AVAILABLE AT NO COST BY WRITTEN REQUEST TO: 

MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

TECHNICAL SERVICES BRANCH 

WESTVIEW BUILDING, LYMAN SCHOOL GROUNDS 

WESTBOROUGH, MA 01581 



Furthermore, at the time of first printing, eight (8) copies of each report published 
by this office are submitted to the State Library at the State House in Boston; these 
copies are subsequently distributed as follows: 

. On shelf; retained at the State Library (two copies); 

. microfilmed; retained at the State Library; 

. delivered to the Boston Public Library at Copley Square; 

. delivered to the Worcester Public Library; 

. delivered to the Springfield Public Library; 

. delivered to the University Library at UMass, Amherst; 

. delivered to the Library of Congress "in Washington, D.C. 

Moreover, this wide circulation is augmented by inter-library loans from the above- 
listed libraries. For example, a resident of Winchendon can apply at the Local 
library for loan of the Worcester Public Library's copy of any DWPC/TSB report. 

A complete list of reports published since 1963 is updated annually and printed in 
July. This report, entitled "Publications of the Technical Services Branch, 1963- 
(current year)," is also available by writing to the TSB office in Westborough. 



1990 WESTFIELD RIVER SURVEY 



WATER QUALITY DATA 

WASTEWATER DISCHARGE DATA 

WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS 



Prepared By 

William J. Dunn, Jr. 
Regional Planner 



MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 

TECHNICAL SERVICES BRANCH 

WESTBOROUGH, MASSACHUSETTS 



EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 
SUSAN F. TIERNEY, SECRETARY 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
DANIEL S. GREENBAUM, COMMISSIONER 

DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 
BRIAN M. DONAHOE, DIRECTOR 



JULY 1991 



TITLE : 



1990 Westfield River Survey Water Quality, Wastewater 
Discharge Data and Water Quality Analysis 



DATE: 



July 1991 



AUTHOR: 



William J. Dunn, Jr., Regional Planner 



REVIEWED BY: 

Paul M. Hogan, Super • 
Basin Planning / 



APPROVED BY: 



ervisor 



ok 




v /( J)*^^wa~ 



Alan N. Cooperwan, supervisor 
Technical Services Branch 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ITEMS PAGE 

List of Tables ii 

List of Figures iv 

Abstract . 1 

Introduction 2 

1990 Water Quality Data 22 

Description of the Watershed; Pollution of the Past Cleanup Actions; 6 4 
Restoration of Water Quality, Water Uses 

Water Quality Analysis 6 6 

Water Quality Changes, Comparison with 19 85 Data 7 

Recommendations 7 8 



LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE TITLE PAGE 

1 Westfield River Survey 1990 Location of Sampling Stations 18 

2 List of Discharges 19 

3 Westfield River Basin, Water Segment Classification 2 

4 Time, Temperature, Dissolved oxygen, pH 23 

5 Summary of Dissolved Oxygen 24 

6 BOD 5 2 5 

7 Ammonia-Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrogen, Kjeldahl-Nitrogen, pH, 26 

Alkalinity - June 27, 1990 

8 Ammonia-Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrogen, Kjeldahl-Nitrogen, pH, 2 7 

Alkalinity - August 8, 1990 

9 Ammonia-Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrogen, Kjeldahl-Nitrogen, pH, 28 

Alkalinity - September 12, 199 

10 Total Phosphorus, Suspended Solids, Fecal Coliform, Chloride, 29 

and Hardness - June 27, 199 

11 Total Phosphorus, Suspended Solids, Fecal Coliform, Chloride, 30 

and Hardness - August 8, 199 

12 Total Phosphorus, Suspended Solids, Fecal Coliform, Chloride, 31 

and Hardness - September 12, 1990 

13 Fecal Coliform - October 12, 1990 32 

14 Metals - June 27, 1990 33 

15 Metals - August 8, 1990 34 
16a Metals - September 12, 1990 3 5 
16b EPA Freshwater Metals Criteria for Aquatic Life Protection 36 

17 Microtox"' Samples Tested 3 7 

18 Microtox"" Results 3 8 

19 Gas Chromatography Spectrometry Analysis of Purgeable 40 

Organic s 

2 Chlorophyll a and Algae Counts 41 

21 Rainfall Data (June 10 - September 13) 42 

22 Flow Data 4 3 

23 Instream and WWTP Discharge Loadings, 1990 44 

24 Instream and WWTP Discharge Loadings, 1985 48 

25 Water Quality Comparison 1985, 1990 50 



li 



TABLE 


26 


27a 


27b 


27c 


27d 


27e 


28a 


28b 


2 8c 


28d 


28e 



LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) 

TITLE PAGE 

Instream Loadings Comparison 1985, 1990 51 

Huntington wwtp 199 Data 54 

Russell WWTP 1990 Data 55 

Strathmore WWTP 199 Data 56 

Westfield WWTP 1990 Data 57 

Columbia Manufacturing 199 Data 5 8 

Comparison of Huntington WWTP 1985 and 1990 Data 59 

Comparison of Russell WWTP 1985 and 1990 Data 60 

Comparison of Strathmore WWTP 19 85 and 199 Data 61 

Comparison of westfield WWTP 1985 and 1990 Data 62 
Comparison of Columbia Manufacturing WWTP 1985 and 1990 Data 63 



in 



LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE TITLE PAGE 

1 Water Quality Classification 3 

2 Location of Sampling Stations, Westfield River 1990 Survey 5 

3 Location of Wastewater Discharges 6 

4 Fecal Coliform vs. River Mile, 19 85 Survey 7 

5 Summary of Dissolved Oxygen, 199 Survey 8 

6 BOD 5 , 1990 Survey 9 

7 Fecal Coliform, 1990 Survey 10 

8 Dissolved Oxygen, 1985 and 1990 Surveys Comparison 11 

9 BOD s , 1985 and 1990 Surveys Comparison 12 

10 Fecal Coliform, 1985 and 1990 Surveys Comparison 13 

11 Total Kjeldahl-Nitrogen, 1985 and 1990 Surveys Comparison 14 

12 BOD 5 Loadings (lbs/day) 1985 and 1990 Surveys Comparison 15 

13 Total Kjeldahl-Nitrogen Loadings (lbs/day) 1985 and 1990 16 

Surveys Comparison 

14 Suspended Solids Loadings (lbs/day) 1985 and 1990 17 

Surveys Comparison 



IV 



ABSTRACT 

Water quality data were collected from eleven (11) stations along the Westfield 
River and parts of four (4) tributaries during the Summer of 199 0. Surveys were 
conducted on June 27, August 8, and September 19. The sampling runs were 
conducted on each of those days beginning at 8:30 a.m. (in Huntington), and 
ending at 1:00 p.m. near the confluence of the Westfield and the Connecticut 
River. Samples were collected at two stations for Microtox 7 " analysis, and at 
all eleven stations for dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform bacteria, pH, 
biochemical oxygen demand, total alkalinity, suspended solids, hardness, total 
Kjeldahl-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, nitrate-nitrogen and total phosphorus . six 
stations were tested for metals: aluminum, chromium, copper, nickel, iron, lead, 
zinc, and silver. Samples were collected at each station for dissolved oxygen 
and pH, and at three of the stations for chlorophyll a and phytoplankton counts. 
Additionally, four (4) dischargers were sampled (same parameters as above): 
three (3) WWTP's (Huntington, Russell, Westfield), and one industry (Strathmore 
Paper Co. ) . 

In addition to the three survey runs, there were two special survey runs 
conducted on July 7, and October 10. These specifically were to take additional 
Microtox™ and metals samples in the Little River, and Westfield City area river 
segments. One of the Microtox 7 " samples, taken on June 27 near downtown 
Westfield, was analyzed as extremely toxic, so these other surveys were conducted 
to verify the June 27 data. Also, on October 9, five (5) dischargers were 
sampled again: the four mentioned above, plus the Columbia Manufacturing company 
discharge. 



INTRODUCTION 

This report presents the compilation of field and laboratory data collected 
during summer of 1990 from eleven stations, and five NPDES dischargers along the 
Westfield River and parts of four tributaries (Tables 1, 2; Figures 2, 3). 
Surveys were conducted on June 27, August 8, and September 19, 199 0, with 2 other 
special surveys conducted on July 7 and October 9, 1990. Water samples at the 
stations were taken on a grab basis, while NPDES discharge samples were generally 
taken on a 24-hour composite basis. Additionally, fish tissue samples were taken 
in mid-October, 1990 in at least five upstream areas of the Westfield and its 
three main tributaries . 

The DWPC has conducted surveys, and subsequently published data reports on the 
Westfield River, in these prior years : 1966, 1971, 1972, 1974, 1975, 1977, 1980, 
1983 and 1985 1 . The last survey was conducted in 1985. Samples for 24 stations 
and six (6) dischargers were collected for dissolved oxygen, chemical analysis, 
total and fecal coliform bacteria. The water quality data collected by the 
Division during May and July of 19 85 demonstrated good water quality in much of 
the basin. Most water quality problems were in the lower portions of the 
Westfield River, where the watershed is predominantly urban. However, water 
quality in the lower portion of the river has improved greatly compared to 
conditions which existed in the 1950 's through the mid-1970' s. 

Segments generally met their classification standards, except for the two lower 
westfield River segments (near the Connecticut River). These two segments have 
a number of industrial and municipal dischargers, plus the problem of significant 
loadings of pollutants from stormwater runoff, and combined sewer discharges. 
These lower portions of the river have a smaller assimilative capacity than the 
upper reaches, in that the slope is much flatter, and the river moves slower, 
resulting in lower reaeration rates. Bacteria concentrations increasingly became 
higher in the two segments of the lower Westfield River. Increasingly, Class 
B standards for fecal coliform (200/org. per 100 ml) were violated as one moved 
down the lower portion. Also, the Little River segment had high fecal coliform 
counts (in violation of B standards). 

The 1990 summer survey was to be synoptic in character, to monitor the ambient 
water quality along the Westfield and its tributaries at eleven selected 
stations. The stations are listed in Table 1, and located in Figure 1 (Westfield 
Basin map with 1990 station locations). DWPC budget constraints, and lack of 
normal summer staffing assistance for monitoring, necessitated the shortening 
of the normal survey to include a more selective monitoring. 

The survey began on each of the days at 8:30 a.m. at station WF08 (see location 
descriptions on Figure 1) and then followed on to stations WF10 , WF12 . WF14 , 
WF19, WF2 . WF21, WF22, WF23, WF24, and ended at station WF25 , near the 
confluence of the Westfield and Connecticut Rivers, (approximately finishing 12- 
12:30 p.m.). Stations were selected based on their proximity to either a 
tributary mouth or downstream from a particular discharge or combined sewer 
overflow. 

Parameters that were sampled at all eleven stations included: chemical , 
nutrient , bacteria , and dissolved oxygen . Additionally, other parameters that 
were selectively sampled included algae chlorophyll , metals . Microtox m , and 
organics (VOA's) at stations WF12 . WF22 , and WF2 5 . Temperature and sample water 
pH were measured in the field at each station on each of the three dates. 

At the conclusion of each survey (station WF25) all samples for chemical, 
nutrient, bacteria, metals and organics were immediately put on ice and delivered 
to the Lawrence Experiment station for analysis (according to standard operating 
procedures). Dissolved oxygen samples were returned to TSB for analysis, via 
the accepted modified Winkler laboratory procedure. Additionally, algae- 
chlorophyll, and Microtox™' samples were taken to TSB for appropriate lab analysis 
by appropriate staff. 



FIGURE 1 



WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATinN 




3(711 



WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 



Separately, on the three (3) survey dates, four 24-hour composite effluent 
samples were collected by internal treatment plant staff, at three (3) municipal 
wastewater treatment facilities, and one (1) manufacturing facility (Strathmore 
Paper Co.). Regular TSB survey staff picked these up and delivered them to the 
Lawrence Experiment Station on the scheduled survey dates as agreed to, 
prearranged times. Composite samples for chemical, nutrient, bacteria, metals 
were collected, and a grab sample for DO was collected on the survey data. An 
ISCO sampler was set up if the treatment plant could not provide a composite 
sample. Each sample (water and effluent) was analyzed for the following 
parameters: DO, pH, 5-day BOD, SS, Cl, Alk, TKN, NH 3 N, N0 3 N, TP, selective 
metals, and fecal coliform bacteria. 

There were 2 additional special surveys conducted on July 7, and October 9. 
These were to take extra Microtox™ and metals samples in the Little River and 
Westfield city area river segments. Included in the sampling was Columbia 
Manufacturing Company and the five dischargers as listed in Table 2, and located 
on the locator map (Figure 3). 

The data was analyzed for purposes of updating the 19 85 Water Quality /Wastewater 
Discharge Data Report. Of particular significance, was to determine if 
the(several) construction grant projects e.g., Huntington wastewater Treatment 
Plant, Westfield Sewer System Rehabilitation Project, Agawam CSO study and 
projects, have had any positive effect in lowering bacteria counts throughout 
the entire lower portion of the Westfield River below the confluence of the west 
branch with the main river stem. Flow measurements were taken at 3 USGS gages 

(1) : Huntington on west branch, Fiske Avenue, one mile upstream of station WF08; 

(2) Huntington on east branch, two and one-half miles upstream of station WF07 
Route #112; (3) Westfield on main branch, one mile downstream of station WF21 
on Route #2 0. The USGS has automatic recording flow gages at these sites. The 
USGS office in Springfield was contacted for automatic flow information on survey 
dates . 



FIGURE 2 



LOCATION OF SAMPLING STATIONS 



Westfield River 1990 Survey 



eosin Lcccric.i Mo 



SAMPLING STATION 







Tollond 



WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 





WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 



Figure 3 



LOCATION OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGES 



FIGURE 



FECAL C0LIF0RM 
vs. 

RIVER MILE 



Westfield River Surveys 1985 



May 29 
July 16 
July 17 



10 



9- 
8- 
7- 
6- 

5- 
4- 



10* 



9- 
8- 

7- 

6- 



o 
o 



Massacnusetts Class B 
Water Quality Standard 
200 Fecal Col i form/lOOml 



■R 



M 
"IT 



4E 



■H 



C_> 



TO 
U 
CD 



10' 



9- 
8- 
7- 
6- 

5- 
4- 



10' 



i! 
II 



ir 



# 



4t 



H 



"l! 

ir 

l! 

JL 



Al*. 



j; 



II 



1* 

5 



i] 



-n 

Hi 

i 



it 



Ji 



!i 



1* 



li 

H 
I: 



Ur 



I! 
II 

i; 



4t 



t: 



tr 



Ji 



JUL 

i 



H 



H 

1 

ii 



Sampl e 
Station 



W 



m 



OO 
o 



o 



OO 



kJ\J W 



C\J 



m 



LD 



C\J 



(XI 



\J W 



CD 
CM 
CM 



m 
cm 



CM 



in 

C\j 



\J 



- — 



River 
Mile 



35 



I 

30 



25 



20 



15 



10 



T 

o 









^ 








15) 








UJ) 








C 




c 





O) 




CO 




>s 




03 




X 




OQ 




o 


LO 


^_ 







CD 


Rive 


C/} 


olved 


1 1 


"D 


o 


CO 


LJ— 


tfiel 


o> 


(0 




G) 


b ! 




CO 




H— 









o 




<: 




Summary 




GO 



CO 



O -- 



C\J s 

u. 



CO 



00 * 



o* 


^ 


^ 


CN 

U. 




* 


o 


CO 


* 





CVJ 




T- 2 

9 


S 




^ 


*t 





"*" 


> 




cc 



CVJ 



CO 



GO 



o 

CN 



CVJ 
CVJ 



CVJ 



o 

u. 

CO * 
CVJ 



(|/6UJ) U96AXQ P9A|0SS!Q 



8 





C 








'(75 








CO 








CQ 


> 


*— s 


CO 













> 


3 


E 


13 


CE 


CO 


0D5( 


LL 


ield 


O 
G> 




5= 




CD 




w 








o 








£ 















<1 o 

X 












51 9 

l ' • 
1 1 

"^0 _...<] o 


— 










o 

V 
\ * 


— 








o 


\ v 


— 








O) 




1 * 


— 








* — 




/ '' 






r^ 


00 , 


^_ 




cm o 






CN 


-t— ' ; 


CD ! 




\ \ 








w i. 


_Q 




\ \ 


— 




CD [ 


] D<3 


E° 




\ N ■ 






c 


Cn: 




\ x ■ 








Z3 i 

< • 


Septe 




• 
• 


3 O 

* ■ 
/ 


— 


i 


1 


i i 


1 


<1 a 

i i i i 





01 



\r> 



cvj s 



CO 



f) 

M 




_ U. 




00 * 




M 




M 




os 


_ 


T" 






* 


o 


Cfl 


~. * 





CVJ 


■ «■ 


i 


2 




^ 


^t 





*— 


> 



CD 



_ 00 



O 
CM 



SI 



CsJ 



s 
co* 

CVJ 



(I/Buj) 9Q09 







*-* 






E 




c 


o 




■MB 

■ tmmm 


o 




cn 






cO 


-••^ 




CQ 


>< z 


1^ 


^ 


o a. 





ive 


1^ 


3 


cc 


CO c 


LL 


tfield 


1990 

olifor 






O 




£ 


Fecal 



<? o. a 






<] S3 O 

: I \ 






o 


* 1 V 


^~~ , 




/ [ 


1 

^ 1 




I , 


^ I 




j 


_Q* 


— 


/ 


° ! 






-+-» ' 






O 




/ 








CNJ 




/ i 


T 




■ Nr^si o □ 


L_ 




^■<f N v ti. 


CD 
_Q 






E° 




i ' 
i ' 

i 


CD 

Q_ 
CD 




i ; 


CO 


— 


i J 
i ' 


00 , 




i ' ' 

1 ; 


i 

-^ i 


_ 


i ;' 
i ' 


OT J. 

Z5<0 




4 ; o ci 


Z5 ! 






< ' 


" 








\ ' ;' 

\ ' i 


r^ 






CN i 




1 * 


, 


1 


\ ' 


. 




<p -* dp 


CD 

c : 




i \ 


D : 




i \ i\ 


3 ■ 





i i ;' '. 








<k \ OQ 






N \ 




_ __ 


\ \ \ 






\ \ . \ 






N \ 






I , '<i * , b fci , 






miiii' i Im i i i i i linn i i Inn i i i i li 


Mill 1 





in 



CNJ 3 



~ ^t 



- CO 






- 00^ 



O* - 



*■ 

*- > 

■ mtmm 

CC 



_ CO 



_ CO 



-la 



CM 



S 

CO* 
CM 



GwOOlVNdRl) wjqwoq |B08j 



10 



CO 

:5 

• MM 





c 






o 






en 












CO 




sin 


omp 


(I/6LL 


CO 

CQ 


o 

CO 


C 


^i* 


>» 











O) 


> 


Surv 


Oxy 





o 


lived 


i 







^ 


u 


£ 


1 985 and 


Diss 




(|/Buj) ue6Axo p8A|0SS|Q 



n 







c 






o 






en 












CO 






Q. 




C 

■ mmm 


E 




CO 


o 




co 


O 

CO ^ 


o 


iver 


Survey 
D5(mg 


igure 


IdR 


o 


2 O 


LL 


stfi 


8 m 




o 


▼~ 




£ 


1 985 and 



□ < 




— 


<i] rj] 


— 




survey 

A 




— 




1985 


....-4 


— 




1990 survey 


] 


t 

» 
< 
1 
1 

1 




— 


i <i 


— 


\ \ 

\ X 

\ \ 

\ V 

\ X 
\ X 

\ \ 

\ X 


— 


JT / 




I I I III , ^ I ■ 





in 



cvj a 



CO 



Up 

00* 



IN 

OS - 

o C/) 

% 

i 



^ 

*- > 

00 



-8 
-SI 



CO CO ^ CM 

(i/Sai) gaoa 



CN 



S 

co* 

CN 



12 







C 






o 






CO 






^- ,-~-. 






CO c 




C 

■ immm 


F ° 
s O 




52 


O T- 




cd 


O ^> 




CD 


« 2 


o 


L- 


&Q- 







> 


=j E 


13 


cc 


O) 


"D 


w * 


LL 


O 


o £ 




estfi 


^ O 




£ 


1 985 and 
Fecal 



o <\ 


□ 












— 


CD 








$ 


— 








>^ 










CD 











> O 










L_ 










Z3 




I o 


\ cti 


CO 






\ 




O 






X 




CD 






I 




CD 






y I 




^ — 




o 


"<I o 

1 
t 

* 

4 

■' 1 

I 

\ 

t 

» 

i 
t 

* 




- dry 1985 survey 
A 


— 




1 

1 
1 

1 




CD 








1 
1 


[ 


3 


3 


— 


0. 


' 


k i 


CO 










\ 


O 








> \ 


O) 


— 






n \ 


en 






0. 


ig to 


^ 


— 




I 


i i 


Of , | 


i 




II 1 1 I I 


i In i i i 1 


i n 1 1 1 i i l i 1 1 1 1 1 


i i I i 





g g o O CO 



CO T- 



CO T- 



CO i- 

(iWOOlVNdfll) LUJOiHOQ |B09J 



O « 



CM s 

5 



- <* 



- CO 






CO * 



OS - 

_. CN 

o CO 

5 

Ml o» 



"* 

^ > 



CO 



GO 



O 
CM 



SI 



CM 



3 

CO* 
CM 



13 







C 






o 






en 






'C ^2" 






cd "^ 






Q. °> 




c 


E & 




en 


O - 






O g 

CO O) 


Figure 1 


Id River 


Survey 
lahl Nitro 











O) 2 




GO 


O) o 







«■■■ • ■■■■J 

5* 




^ 






C CXJ 






■ o 






iS H 






00 






O) 






T " 



<3 



<3. 



<3 



<Ii 



^ 



CNJ 



m 



o 



(l/Buu) NM1 



CD 

> 

^_ : 
D : 

LO : 
00 i 
CD 



CD 

> 



D 
00 

O 
CD 
O) 



C] 



O --- 
% 

CNJ 3 



CO 






CO* 



M 

M 



os - 

8 en 



CO 



GO 



8 



5 



-Si 



CVJ 



s 

CNJ 



14 



C\J 3 








u. 




00 » 




CN 




M 




OJ 


^ 


^— 


<n 




* 


O 


CO 


5 





CVJ 


a «m» 


i 


2 




^ 


^t 





, ™ 


> 



cc 



C\J 



(Aep/sqj) 9009 



15 




o ^ 



C\J 3 



- CO 



*> 
m 



- 00 * 



05 - 



o 



CO 
CM .-= 



* 



CO 



CO 



o 

CM 



- SI 



CM 



no 

o 



CM 



DC 






CM 



CM 



(Aep/sqi) n>I1 



16 










\ * 

X. » 

f\ 1 I 




>N 


\ '' 




CD 


\ \ 




> , 


\ \ 




l_ : 


\ * 




D : 






^<jj 


jr 




m ; 






00 ■ 


\ / 




CD 


\ J 
\ / 




* 


\ / 




>s 


V / 




CD 


\ / 




> 




N / 




l_ 




N / 




D 








co c 


] 






O 










CD 






: 




CD 








T 




1 — 










<3(i 


\ Xv 

1,1,1,^ 



O >o 



- (N 



CD 







Ui 




00 * 




M 




M 




o* 


mm 


T"- 


U. 


O 


*W 


5 


<D 


CM 


■ «V 




2 




L_ 


Tf 





t " 


> 



CO 



CO 



O 
CM 



i 



- a 



a 



s 

u. 

CO * 
CM 



CM 



(Aep/sqi) spjios papuedsns 



17 



TABLE 1 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

LOCATION OF SAMPLING STATIONS 



STATION 
WF08 
WF10 

WF12 

WF14 

WF19 
WF20 
WF21 
WF22 
WF23 
WF24 
WF25 



STREAM 
west Branch 
Westfield River 

Westfield River 

Westfield River 

Little River 
Westfield River 
Powdermill Brook 
Westfield River 
Westfield River 
Westfield River 
Westfield River 



LOCATION 

Route 112 bridge, Huntington 

Off Route 2 below Texon Co., 
Huntington 

Off Route 20 below Westfield 
Paper Co., Russell 

Off Route 20 below Mass. Pike, 
Westfield 

Off South Meadow Road, Westfield 

Route 2 02 bridge, Westfield 

Union Street, Westfield 

Frog Hole, Route 20, Westfield 

Robinson State Park, Agawam 

Route 147 bridge, West Springfield 

Route 5 bridge, West Springfield 



RIVER MILE 
25.5 (25.1 + 0.4) 
24.7 

20.9 

17.3 

11.2 (11.0 + 0.2) 

12.3 

10.1 (10.0 + 0.1) 

9.9 

7.6 

2.2 

0.4 



18 



TABLE 2 

19 9 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

LIST OF DISCHARGES 



1. Huntington Wastewater Treatment Facility 

2. Russell Wastewater Treatment Facility 

3. Strathmore Paper Company, Woronoco Mills Wastewater Treatment 

Facility 

4. Westfield Wastewater Treatment Facility 

5. Columbia Manufacturing Wastewater Treatment Facility 



19 



U 
< 





z 




o 




H 




Eh 




< 




u 


z 


M 


H 


fa 


VI 


H 


< 


CO 


OQ 


CO 


os 


3 


u 


u 


> 




H 


Eh 


as 


z 


EH 


£ 


co 


o 


u 


u 


2 


CO 



01 



co 

Q 
W 

u 

z 

Eh 

z 



w 

Eh 
< 
3D 
< 



Eh 
W 
fa 
S 

O 
Eh 



z 
o 

M 
Eh 

< 

o 



w 
< 

CJ 



fa 

o 

co 
— s 

co a 
-'J 
u ffi 
o O 

OS OS 
D 0- 
O 
CO 



X 
Eh 

H 

IS 

D fa 
O J 

OQ 

OS o 
fa OS 
Eh fa 

3 



Eh 

OS 
O 
fa 

04 

3 



CO CO 



z 
o 

H 

Eh 
< 

U 
OS 

U fa 



u 

CO 

D 



Eh 
< 
2 



OS CO 

H H 
OS £ 



z 
o 

Eh H 
Z Eh 
fa fa 



2 



w CJ 
CO CO 

w 
a 



w 



CO 



CO 



CO 



CO 



a 

< 

fa fa 

2 2 

CJ o 

CO CO 

\ \ 

03 0Q 



a 

< 

fa 

2 
u 

CO 

03 



Q 

< 

fa 

U 

OQ 



OQ 



in O 

• • 

r» o 

I l 

in m 

• • 



1— ) 

1 


O 

■ 


1 

1— 1 


1 

o 


• 


• 


GO 


1-i 



m 

CM 

I 

in 

CM 






m 

CM 





u 


d> 


> 


•H 


s: 


cc 


o 




c 


TJ 


ia 


r-l 


P. 


CU 


03 


••H 




4-1 


•P 


P 


co 


CO 


0) 


<D 


2 


2 





c 


n 




O 


•H 


0> 




•P 


(0 


> 






e 


•H 




■P 




OS 




(1) JZ 






M 


P T3 




o 


•-i 


.-H 




0> 


3 


ai 




CQ 




•H 






d) 4-1 


c 


C 


o 


-P 





•H 


c 


n 


-p 




a) 


0> 


D> 


0) 


3 2 


C 


CJ 


■H 




•H 


P. 4-1 


E -p 


3 


c 


a) 


C 


O 


O -P 


3 


to 


cj 


CO 


X 





i-i 


u 


J= 


> 





•H 


c 


OS 


(0 




u 


-o 


PQ 


,— 1 




0) 


d) 


•H 


<-i 


4-J 


T3 


4-> 


T3 


CO 


•^ 


0) 


z 


2 







C M 








•P 








•H 0) 








0) 









O fl > 




73 




O d) C 


■p 







-P E-h 




.H 




•P 2 O 




-P - 




as 




0) 




-P 


£ - 


g 




E-C 




•H 




>i.C D^ 


d) O d) 


3 (3 




<TJ P T3 




4-1 




O -P C 


o c o> 


U O 




Q-rlH 




■P 




> •-) -H 


C id T3 


0) 




3 0> 




CO 




fl5 3 P 


d) W( -H 


fa d) 




0) -H 




CD 




CO c 


3 03 l-i 


H 


c 


HOW 


C 


2 




0) 3 


^ Si 


C -1 





H U4J 









C O X 


%4 a *d 


•H -H 


■p 


•H C CO 


■p 


E 




•H C 


C CO CN ^H 


> 


CP 


> 0) 0) 


CF 


d> 




CD » 


O d) O d> 


0) 0) 


c 


0) 3 2 


c 


•P 




<o a x: 


CJ 2 CM -H 


CJ r-l 


•H 


•H >-i 


•H 


CO 


p 


UHU 


4-1 


1-1 -P 


■p 


■P «M E -P 


c 


0) 


l-i 4-1 c 


E -C • 4-> 


3 -P 


c 


■P C d) 


c 


•H 


> 


3 C flJ 


O -P tt) « 


O H 


3 


•H -P 


3 


«3 


■H 


O O Ui 


U -H 4-> d) 


CO J 


X 


JOffl 


X 


z 


OS 


co u a 


fa 3 OS 2 



20 






Q 
« 

D 
Z 
H 

Z 
O 

u 



W 
CQ 



CO 

a 
u 
w 
z 

z 



u 

Eh 
< 



o 
co 

— s 

CO u 

^r3 

U CQ 



u 

os 

D 
O 

co 



>H 

E-" 

H 
3£ 

D U 

O J 

03 

es o 

Eh ^ 



z* 




OS co 




O D 


CQ 


(U En 


Oh 


a. < 




D Eh 




CQ W 





u 

CO 

3 



z 

o 

M 
Eh 



OS 
W Cn 



Eh 



Eh 

Z 



z 

o 

H 
Eh 

Cm 



O OS 

w u 

CO CO 

w 



4J 

C I 

<D C 

a) <t3 

•p e 

(0 



U 
CD 
•P 
O P 
CO CD 



I 



CD 
•H 
P 

M • 

O U 

CD 

a) cd 

O CQ 

e 

<d o 

C P 

a) c 

P -H 



0) 

i £ 

C 1) 
O P 

01 
CT> >, 
G CQ 



CQ 
O 

co id 

U Cl, CO 

I I 



CO 
P 

th: 



o 

4h 



O 
O 



<d 



M 
CD 

id 4J 
o o 

a) id 



cq 



o 

+j 

(V 

a> c 
cn-n 

T3^ 
•H 

In C 

o 

CN +J 
O 
CN S 

• 5 

cv m 

4J o^ 

OS < 



■p 

c 

a 
cu 

4-> 

id 
XJ 
id 

O 

CO 

u 
I 



CQ 
O 
CO 

u 

I 



£ 
u 
o 

4H 
•H 
^1 


o 



CQ 

o 

S 
Q 

I 



id 



id P 
o o 
cu «d 



CO 

z 



CQ 





CO 


o 


OS CO 


r^ 


o 


u w 


1 


1 


> J 


co 


CO 


H H 


• 


• 


OS s 


CN 


r* 





CD 






■H 


« 


1 


P 


P 

c 


c 


Vh 


• CD 


•H 


O 


M E 


A 




CD CD 


E 


-^ 


3 -P 




0) 


CD id 


u 


o 


to X3 


CD 


c 


id 


P 


id 





P 


c 


P o 


(1) 


CD 


C CO 


03 


P 


•h a 



CQ 




i E 




C CD 




O -P 




CQ 




C7> >i 




C CQ 




•H 




.H CD 


CQ 


•H P 


o 


<d -H 


CO 


Cm CQ 


CJ 


1 


1 


6 




U 




O 




4-1 




•H 




rH 




o id 




O -H 




M 




r-l CD 




id P 




O U 




cd id 




fe XJ 





CO 

z 



U 
CO 

CQ 



O 
I 



CO 



a 

< 

In 

U 
CO 

\ 

03 



O 

o 

CN 

co 








CD 








4-> 




-a ja 








M 




•H 4J 









CD CD 




^•H «. 




-* 


■p 


C J3 > 




CO 3 i-i 







cd x: u 


•H +J --H T3 




CD 







O M V CD 


iH -H OS <-H 




CO CD > 




1-1 


C O-H > 


3 CD 


1-1 


- O -H 




03 


CD O 3 -H 


C 4J -H 


CD 


c c cs 






S U OS 


5 CD 3 4-1 


> 


O CD 




^H 


rH 03 CD 


ouuoi 


•iH 


■P 3 T3 T3 


iH 


4H O T3 T3 


4-> C -H C 


OS 


IjHrlr^ 


•H 


C E C rH rH 


CD 4-> -H 




O 4-1 CD 


CD 


E 


rt CD CD CD 


S 3 O l-l 


CD 


X C -H 


•H 


Sh 


U < 3 -H -H 


id — i cu a. 


rH 


4-14-1 


CD 


rH 4-1 4-1 


3 4-t c co 


•P 


e o -p 


4J 


TD 


g X 4H p 4-> 


id c c 


+J 


O CQ 


CQ 


3 


P C CQ CQ 


CP • 


•H 


M O CD 


CD 


O 


M -H O CD CD 


< O U 2 


J 


Ln P 2 


S 


04 


fcJUSr 







•H 






E 






in 






• 






CO 






•• 




■H 


a 




E 







O p 




• 


id 




CT\ 


o 




CO 


•H 

4H 




• • 


CQ 




c 


CQ 







•d 




•H 


^i 




P 


o 




id 






u 


D> 


•H 


•H 


C 


E 


4-1 


•H 




•H 


4-> 


o 


IQ 


r4 


• 


CQ 


O 


M3 


id 


a 


O 


•-\ 


a 


rH 


CJ 


3 
(0 


• • 


c 


>i 


-a 


-H 


rH 


CD 


•P rH 


CQ 


u 


id 


CQ 





•H 


CD 


a-p 


CQ 


a, -m 


CQ 


3 


id 


< 


CO 


Cm 


CQ 


CQ 


cn 


CD 


CD 


CD 



XXX 



21 



199 WESTFIELD WATER QUALITY DATA 






22 



TABLE 4 
1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 
TIME, TEMPERATURE, DISSOLVED OXYGEN, pH 



STATION 

WF08 * 
** 

*** 

**** 



JUNE 27, 1990 

0935 

71 

8.4 

7.3 



AUGUST 8, 199 

0930 

75 

8.0 

6.4 



SEPTEMBER 19, 1990 

1030 

65 

7.5 

6.5 



WF10 



WF12 



1025 

73 

8.1 

7.2 

1054 

75 

8.1 

7.2 



1015 

70 

9.0 

6.7 

1045 

71 

8.0 

6.5 



1050 

66 

8.0 

6.0 

1120 

66 

8.0 

6.5 



WF14 



1152 

76 

8.1 

6.5 



1125 

70 

7.5 

6.4 



1145 

68 

7.5 

7.0 



WF19 



1235 

74 

8.4 

7.1 



1205 

72 

8.0 

6.4 



1215 

68 

7.6 

6.1 



WF2 



WF21 



WF22 



1218 

76 

7.5 

7.1 

1310 

68 

8.5 

6.9 

1249 

77 

7.7 

6.9 



1215 

72 

8.5 

6.4 

1230 

69 

7.0 

6.4 

1250 

72 

8.0 

6.4 



1227 

66 

9.0 

6.2 

1315 

60 

8.5 

6.4 

1325 

68 

8.0 

6.4 



WF23 



WF24 



WF25 



1353 

76 

7.5 

7.1 

1416 

78 

8.2 

7.1 

1428 

76 

7.6 

7.1 



0120 

72 

7.6 

6.4 

0130 

72 

8.7 

6.4 

1342 

74 

7.6 

6.3 



1340 

66 

7.5 

6.5 

1355 

69 

9.0 

6.5 

1410 

68 

8.5 

6.8 



Time (DST) 
Temperature (°F) 
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) 
**** pH (standard Units) 



** 
*** 



23 



TABLE 5 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

SUMMARY OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg/1) 



STATION 


WF08 


WF10 


WF12 


WF14 


WF19 


WF2 


WF21 


WF22 


WF23 


WF24 


WF25 



MAX. 

8.4 

9.0 

8.1 

8.1 

8.4 

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.6 

9.0 

8.5 



MIN. 


AVG 


7.5 


8.0 


8.0 


8.5 


8.0 


8.1 


7.5 


7.8 


7.6 


8.0 


7.5 


8.3 


7.0 


7.8 


7.7 


7.9 


7.5 


7.6 


8.2 


8.6 


7.6 


8.1 



24 



TABLE 6 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

BOD 5 (mg/1) 



STATION 


JUNE 27. 1990 


AUGUST 8. 1990 


SEPTEMBER 19, 1990 


WF08 


2.4 


3.6 


2.4 


WF10 


2.4 


1.8 


1.8 


WF12 


3.6 


3.3 


2.7 


WF14 


3.3 


2.4 


4.8 


WF19 


3.3 


2.4 


1.8 


WF20 


4.2 


4.5 


1.5 


WF21 


- 


2.4 


1.5 


WF22 


7.2 


2.4 


2.7 


WF23 


3.3 


3.0 


2.1 


WF24 


3.9 


2.4 


2.4 


WF25 


7.2 


3.0 


2.0 



- No measurement taken 



25 



TABLE 7 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

AMMONIA-NITROGEN, NITRATE-NITROGEN, KJELDAHL-NITROGEN, pH, ALKALINITY 

(All results in mg/1 unless noted) 



June 27. 19 9 









TOTAL 






AMMONIA- 


NITRATE- 


KJELDAHL 




STATION 


NITROGEN 


NITROGEN 


NITROGEN 


DH* 


WF08 


0.03 


0.21 


0.34 


6.5 


WF10 


0.04 


0.30 


0.22 


6.5 


WF12 


0.29 


0.24 


1.4 


6.3 


WF14 


0.27 


0.25 


0.95 


6.5 


WF19 


0.06 


0.83 


0.47 


6.5 


WF2 


0.24 


0.89 


0.71 


6.6 


WF21 


0.13 


1.16 


0.49 


- 


WF22 


0.46 


0.66 


0.90 


6.6 


WF23 


0.21 


0.89 


0.53 


6.7 


WF24 


0.19 


0.87 


0.71 


6.8 


WF2 5 


0.30 


0.89 


1.3 


6.7 



ALKALINITY 



19 
18 
13 
18 
18 
18 

21 
26 

25 
24 



- No measurement taken 

* Result in standard units 



26 






TABLE 8 

199 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

AMMONIA-NITROGEN, NITRATE -NITROGEN, KJELDAHL-NITROGEN, pH, ALKALINITY 

(All results in mg/1 unless noted) 



August 8, 1990 









TOTAL 








AMMONIA- 


NITRATE- 


KJELDAHL 






STATION 


NITROGEN 


NITROGEN 


NITROGEN 


DH* 


ALKALINITY 


WF08 


0.02 


0.16 


0.68 


6.8 


13 


WF10 


0.02 


0.26 


0.57 


6.4 


9 


WF12 


0.08 


0.22 


0.49 


6.4 


9 


WF14 


0.10 


0.92 


0.45 


6.4 


10 


WF19 


0.03 


0.51 


0.59 


6.5 


12 


WF20 


0.14 


0.55 


0.92 


6.5 


10 


WF21 


0.14 


600 


0.91 


6.9 


37 


WF22 


0.15 


0.35 


0.99 


6.5 


11 


WF23 


0.08 


0.34 


0.61 


6.5 


12 


WF24 


0.09 


0.52 


0.68 


6.6 


12 


WF25 


0.14 


0.52 


0.94 


6.6 


12 



* Results in standard units 



27 



TABLE 9 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

AMMONIA-NITROGEN, NITRATE-NITROGEN, KJELDAHL-NITROGEN, pH, ALKALINITY 

(All results in mg/1 unless noted) 



September 12, 1990 









TOTAL 








AMMONIA- 


NITRATE- 


KJELDAHL 






STATION 


NITROGEN 


NITROGEN 


NITROGEN 


DH* 


ALKALINITY 


WF08 


0.04 


0.41 


0.83 


6.9 


22 


WF10 


0.15 


- 


1.1 


6.9 


19 


WF12 


0.29 


0.56 


0.89 


6.9 


20 


WF14 


0.18 


0.52 


1.1 


6.3 


20 


WF19 


0.08 


1.08 


0.79 


6.4 


19 


WF20 


0.11 


0.43 


0.49 


6.5 


21 


WF21 


0.09 


1.45 


0.63 


6.8 


44 


WF22 


0.59 


0.79 


1.1 


6.6 


24 


WF24 


0.16 


1.02 


0.83 


7.1 


28 


WF25 


0.24 


1.05 


0.62 


6.8 


30 



- No measurement taken 

* Results in standard units 



28 



TABLE 10 

199 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, SUSPENDED SOLIDS, FECAL COLIFORM, CHLORIDE, AND HARDNESS 

(All results in mg/1 unless noted) 



June 27, 1990 





TOTAL 


SUSPENDED 


FECAL* 






STATION 


PHOSPHORUS 


SOLIDS 


COLIFORM 


CHLORIDE 


HARDNESS 


WF08 


0.09 


<1 


20 


9.5 


25 


WF10 


0.09 


3.0 


60 


7.2 


24 


WF12 


0.10 


5.0 


100 


12 


22 


WF14 


0.05 


2.5 


80 


10 


24 


WF19 


0.08 


1.0 


200 


11 


26 


WF20 


0.06 


1.0 


60 


9.9 


25 


WF21 


0.06 


- 


160 


- 


53 


WF22 


0.10 


3.5 


120 


14 


23 


WF23 


0.09 


2.5 


80 


14 


31 


WF24 


0.11 


5.5 


2,000 


14 


32 


WF25 


0.12 


9.0 


1,500 


16 


33 



- No measurement taken 
* Results in org/100 ml 



29 



TABLE 11 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, SUSPENDED SOLIDS, FECAL COLIFORM, CHLORIDE, AND HARDNESS 

(All results in mg/1 unless noted) 

August 8, 1990 





TOTAL 


SUSPENDED 


FECAL* 






STATION 


PHOSPHORUS 


SOLIDS 


COLIFORM 


CHLORIDE 


HARDNESS 


WF08 


0.04 


2.5 


400 


6 


21 


WF10 


0.16 


12 


2,400 


3 


16 


WF12 


0.13 


9.5 


2,600 


4 


17 


WF14 


0.06 


15 


14,000 


4 


43 


WF19 


0.07 


9.0 


1,800 


8 


19 


WF2 


0.11 


16 


14,000 


4 


17 


WF21 


0.13 


6.0 


1,000 


26 


54 


WF22 


0.15 


14 


23,000 


5 


18 


WF23 


0.12 


18 


13,000 


6 


18 


WF24 


0.12 


20 


7,000 


5 


18 


WF25 


0.18 


7.0 


10,000 


6 


20 



* Results in org/100 ml 






30 



TABLE 12 

1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, SUSPENDED SOLIDS, FECAL COLIFORM, CHLORIDE, AND HARDNESS 

(All results in mg/1 unless noted) 

September 12. 1990 





TOTAL 


SUSPENDED 


FECAL* 






STATION 


PHOSPHORUS 


SOLIDS 


COLIFORM 


CHLORIDE 


HARDNESS 


WF0 8 


0.04 


9.5 


40 


1 


25 


WF10 


0.09 


11 


90 


7 


26 


WF12 


0.08 


13 


80 


8 


25 


WF14 


0.05 


10 


150 


10 


28 


WF19 


0.05 


6.5 


180 


12 


28 


WF2 


0.11 


12 


180 


11 


31 


WF21 


0.29 


10 


440 


27 


32 


WF22 


0.15 


12.2 


420 


14 


53 


WF23 


. 0.12 


15 


480 


6 


18 


WF24 


0.13 


16 


100 


5 


18 


WF25 


0.19 


19 


4,400 


6 


20 



* Results in org/100 ml 



31 



TABLE 13 

199 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

FECAL COLIFORM 

(Results in org/100 ml) 

October 10. 1990 



FECAL 
STATION COLIFORM 

WF08 200 



WF12 600 

WF20 300 

WF22 3,000 

WF24 2,100 



32 






OS 

to 

> 

1-1 

M 



to 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


• 


• 


• 


* 


• 


• 


• 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


V 


V 


V 


V 


V 


V 


V 


CM 


(N 


<N 


in 


en 


in 


m 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 


• 


• 


I 


• 


* 


• 


• 


o 


o 

V 


o 

V 


o 


o 


o 


o 



s 

D 

M 

s 

Q 
< 



o 
o 



o 
o 

o 

V 



CN 
O 

o 



o 
o 

o 

V 



o 
o 

o 

V 



n 
o 
o 



o 
o 



2 
O 
H 
2 

o 

OS 
X 

u 



o 
o 



o 
o 



CO 

o 
o 



CO 

o 
o 



o 
V 



i-i 
o 

o 



o 
o 



in 
o 
o 



Z 

H 
W 
< 

n 

OS 

w 
> 



W 
03 



to 

H 

fa 

CO 



O 



E 






o 
en 



CN 

a> 

c 

3 



a 

CO 



U 

z 

H 



OS 

w 
fa 
fa 
o 
u 



en 

o 
o 


CN 

o 
o 


CN 
O 

© 


o 
o 


o 

o 


iH 

i-H 
O 


o 
en 
o 


o 


o 

V 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


m 
o 


CN 

O 


n 
o 


CN 
O 


CN 
O 


VO 

o 


vo 

o 



CO 


00 


CO 


a\ 


in 


o> 


.-t 


i-H 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


!-t 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 



s 

D 
Z 

M 
S 

D 



r» 


00 


in 


m 


o 


o 


en 


en 


n 


a\ 


** 


VO 


VO 


vo 



w 
w 

to 

z 

z 



o 



o 



vo 

o 



CN 
O 

o 
V 



o 



O 



CO 
O 



z 
o 

OS 
H 



in 


en 


r» 


00 


f-H 


<* 


o 


i-t 


t-i 


•*r 


o 


CN 


CN 


^» 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


o 



z 
o 

H 

< 

w 



CN 


ON 


.-) 


CN 


en 


•<!■ 


in 


r-t 


r-l 


CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 


fa 


fa 


fa 


Cm 


fa 


fa 


fa 


5 


S 


3 


S 


s 


2 


£ 



33 



<N 
O 
O 
O 



CM 
O 
O 



<N 
O 
O 
O 

• 

o 

V 



CM 
O 
O 



CN 
O 
O 
O 

• 

o 
V 



CM 
O 
O 



CO 
O 
O 
O 



CM 

o 
o 

• 

o 
V 



o 
o 
o 

• 

o 
V 



CM 
O 
O 



fN 

o 
o 
o 

• 

o 
V 



o 
o 



2 

H O 

2 o 

Q 

< o 

U V 



o 
o 

• 

o 
V 



o 
o 

o 
V 



o 
o 

* 

o 
V 



o 
o 

o 
V 



o 
o 

• 

o 
V 





W 




< 




OQ 




as 




w 




> 


in 


H 


iH 


as 


u 


a 


►J 


j 


OQ 


w 


< 


H 


Eh 


u* 




Eh 




W 




U 




s 




o 




ON 




<J\ 



2 
D 
H 

2 
o 

OS 



E 



CO 

i 

Eh 



o 



00 

■P 

CD 
3 
D 

3 





n 


^f 


to 


en 


m 


V0 


a 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


< 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


u 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 





«3" 


<N 


CT\ 


P- 


CO 


T 


U 


m 


in 


CM 


CN 


<N 


\£> 


2 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


© 



n 



OS 

u 

Cu 
Cu 
O 
U 



2 
O 

H 
Eh 
< 
E- 

w 



CN 
O 

O 



n 
o 
o 



o 
o 



o 
o 

• 

o 
V 



o 
o 



CN 
O 
O 



00 
O 
O 



CO 

o 
o 



CN 
O 
O 

• 

o 
V 



CM 

o 
o 



o 
o 



CO 

o 
o 



2 














D 














2 


oo 


vo 


<T> 


in 


CTi 


CN 


M 


en 


^ 


CN 


CN 


«» 


*» 


£ 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


D 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 



CN 

i-H 

3 



Cu 
3 



m 

r-t 

3 



o 

CM 
Cu 
3 



CN 

3 



CM 
CM 

3 



34 



TABLE 16(a) 

199 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

METALS (mg/1) 

September 12, 19 9 



STATION 


IRON 


ALUMINUM 


COPPER 


ZINC 


LEAD 


WF12 


0.20 


0.09 


0.005 


0.041 


0.003 


WF14 


0.20 


0.16 


0.005 


0.119 


0.005 


WF20 


0.15 


0.06 


0.003 


0.076 


0.003 



STATION 



WF12 
WF14 
WF20 



CHROMIUM 



CADMIUM 



NICKEL 



<0.001 
<0.001 
<0.001 



0.006 
<0.006 
<0.001 



<0.002 
<0.002 
<0.002 



MERCURY 



<0.0002 
<0.0002 
<0.0002 



35 



TABLE 16(b) 
EPA FRESHWATER METALS CRITERIA FOR AQUATIC LIFE PROTECTION 

(pg/i) 

JANUARY 1991 



METAL 



CRITERIA 



25 



HARDNESS (MG/L CaCo 3 ) 
30 40 50 100 



200 



1 . Aluminum 



Chronic 
Acute 



.087 
.750 



2 . Cadmium 



Chronic 
Acute 



.00038 
.00082 



.00440 
.00100 



00055 
00144 



00066 
00180 



.0011 
.0039 



.0020 
.0086 



3. Chromium III Chronic 

Acute 



.066 
.558 



.077 
.648 



098 
820 



120 
980 



.210 
1.700 



.370 
3.100 



4 . Copper 



Chronic 
Acute 



.0036 
.0048 



.0042 
.0057 



.0054 
.0075 



0065 
0092 



.012 
.018 



.021 
.034 



5. Iron 

6 . Lead 

7. Nickel 



Maximum 



Chronic 
Acute 



Chronic 
Acute 



1.0 



.00054 


.00068 


.00099 


.0013 


.0032 


.0077 


.012 


.015 


.025 


.034 


.082 


.200 


.049 


.056 


.073 


.088 


.016 


.280 


.440 


.512 


.653 


.790 


1.40 


2.5 



36 



TABLE 17 

199 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

MICROTOX™ SAMPLES TESTED 











DATE 


DATE 




LAB pH 


LOG NO. 


SITE 


SAMPLE ' 


rYPE 


COLLECTED 


TESTED 


COLLECTOR 


(Std. Units) 


306 


WF12 


Instream 


Grab 


6/27/90 


6/29/90 


Dunn 


6.7 


307 


WF22 


Instream 


Grab 


6/27/90 


6/28/90 


Dunn 


6.8 


307D 


WF22 


Instream 


Grab 


6/27/90 


6/28/90 


Dunn 


6.7 


308 


WF25 


Instream 


Grab 


6/27/90 


6/28/90 


Dunn 


6.8 


* 


WF22 


Instream 


Grab 


7/11/90 


7/12/90 


Dunn 


- 


327 


WF12 


Instream 


Grab 


8/8/90 


8/9/90 


Dunn 


6.3 


328 


WF19 


Instream 


Grab 


8/8/90 


8/9/90 


Dunn 


6.4 


329 


WF22 


Instream 


Grab 


8/8/90 


8/9/90 


Dunn 


- 


330 


WF25 


Instream 


Grab 


8/8/90 


8/9/90 


Dunn 


6.4 


343 


WF22 


Instream 


Grab 


10/11/90 


10/12/90 


Dunn 


— 



* Log no. not established 
- No measurement taken 



37 



TABLE 18 

199 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

MICROTOX™ RESULTS 



LOG NO, 



5-MINUTE 



15-MINUTE 



30-MINUTE 



306 
307 
307D 
308 



52% 
<5.6% 
<5.6% 



<5.6% 
<5.6% 



* EC 10 
<5.6% EC10 
<5.6% EC10 

* EC10 



306 
307 
307D 
308 



>100% 
<5.6% 
<5.6% 



<5.6% 
<5.6% 



* EC20 
<5.6% EC20 
<5.6% EC20 

* EC2 



306 
307 
307D 
308 



>100% 
<5.6% 
<5.6% 



<5.6% 
<5.6% 



* 


EC50 


<5.6 


EC50 


<5.6 


EC50 


* 


EC50 



7/13/90 
Sample (WF22) 



EC50 



327 
328 
329 
330 
343 



>100% 
>100% 



>100% 
>100% 



>100% EC10 

* EC10 

* EC10 

* EC10 

* EC10 



* Spurious Results - Negative Gamma Values 



38 



TABLE 18 (CONTINUED) 



LOG NO 


327 


328 


329 


330 


343 


327 


328 


329 


330 


343 



5-MINUTE 



15-MINUTE 



3 0-MINUTE 



>100% 
>100% 



>100% 
>100% 



>100% 
>100% 



>100% 
>100% 



>100% EC20 

* EC2 

* EC2 

* EC2 

* EC2 
>100% EC50 

* EC50 

* EC50 

* EC50 

* EC50 



39 



TABLE 19 
1990 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 
GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY - MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS 
OF PURGEABLE ORGANICS (pg/1) 



LAB 


STATION 


NUMBER 


NUMBER 


038813 


WF12 


038814 


WF22 


038815 


WF25 


039024 


WF12 


039023 


WF22 


039025 


WF25 


039171 


WF12 


039173 


WF22 


039172 


WF25 



LOCATION 



DATE 
SAMPLED 


ORGANIC 
DETECTED 


6/27/90 


None 


6/27/90 


None 


6/27/90 


None 


8/8/90 


None 


8/8/90 


None 


8/8/90 


None 


9/12/90 


Methyl 
Ethyl Ke 


9/12/90 


None 


9/12/90 


None 



LEVEL 



Westfield R., Russell 
westfield R., westfield 
Westfield R., w. Springfield 
Westfield R., Russell 
Westfield R., Westfield 
Westfield R., w. Springfield 
westfield R., Russell 

Westfield R., Westfield 
Westfield R., W. Springfield 



3.7 



40 







V] 






Ei 




Z 


Z 




H 


D 




CO 


O 




< 


u 




CQ 






& 


3 




U 


O 


o 


> 

H 


3 


CM 


« 


Q 


w 


Q 


Z 


J 


J 


< 


CQ 


U 




< 


H 


<0I 


Eh 


fa 






Eh 


J 




W 


►4 




u 


X 




3 


a, 




o 


o 




o\ 


OS 




o% 


o 




l-( 


X 

u 



•01 

a 

x • 

33 m 
CM £ 



O 
OH 
O 

X 

u 



Eh 

< 

a 



w 



w 

CQ 

Z 






CN 
CT\ 



CO 

in 



oo 



oo 



V0 



V0 



CN 



in 

00 
CM 



CN 



(N 



<T» 


^« 


r~ 


O 


VO 


<N 


i-l 


i-t 


m 



o 

CM 



CO 
00 



o 



oo 

00 



o 



oo 

00 



o 



CM 



<Ti 



O 



CN 



<j\ 



o 



CM 



CTv 









0) 
•H 








4-1 






T3 


D> 






iH 


C 




.H 


d) 


•H 




rH 


•H 


H 




a) 


4-1 


a 




0) 


P 


w 




a 


(0 






3 


a) 


• 


z 


CC 


s 


2 


o 








H 


^ 


*» 


^ 


Eh 


• 


• 


• 


< 


« 


Pi 


OS 


U 








o 


T3 


•o 


73 


J 


^ 


•H 


iH 




a) 


d) 


a> 




•H 


•H 


•H 




4-1 


4-1 


4-i 




P 


P 


P 




a 


a 


o> 




a> 


0) 


a> 




S 


S 


s 







a> 






•H 






4-1 




T3 


C7> 




»H 


C 


r-H 


a> 


•H 


r-l 


■H 


U 


a) 


4-1 


a 


(0 


P 


en 


(0 


ca 




3 


a> 


• 


tt 


2 


s 


*. 


■ta 


%. 


• 


• 


• 


OS 


OS 


06 


-a 


T3 


T3 


iH 


■H 


•-( 


0) 


0) 


a> 


•H 


•H 


•H 


4-i 


4H 


4-1 


P 


P 


P 


0) 


0] 


(0 


0) 


a> 


<D 


s 


2 


3 



z 








o OS 








H W 


CN 


CN 


in 


Eh OQ 


r-t 


CN 


CN 


< S 


fa 


fa 


fa 


Eh D 


3 


3 


5 


(0 Z 









CN 


CN 


in 


t-H 


CN 


CN 


fa 


fa 


fa 


s 


s 


S 






CO 



en 



a\ 



CN 






41 



TABLE 21 

19 9 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

RAINFALL DATA (June 10 - Sept. 13) UNITS = INCHES 



DATE 



WESTFIELD, MA 



KNIGHTVILLE DAM 



6/10/90 
6/12/90 
6/15/90 
6/19/90 
6/20/90 
6/24/90 
6/26/90 
6/30/90 



JUNE 10-30 TOTAL 



.12 
.11 



.07 
.07 
.10 

.03 
.18 
.01 
.53 



23 



.99 



7/2/90 

7/5/90 

7/10/90 

7/12/90 

7/13/90 

7/21/90 

7/24/90 

7/25/90 



70 



1.60 

.15 
.48 



10 
13 
01 
13 
05 
03 



JULY TOTAL 



2.93 



1.50 



8/1/90 

8/6/90 

8/7/90 

8/8/90 

8/11/90 

8/12/90 

8/14/90 

8/20/90 

8/24/90 

8/25/90 

8/26/90 

8/29/90 



.01 
.06 
.98 
.54 
.68 
.73 
.72 
.16 
.27 
.10 

.05 



12 
32 
77 
01 
45 
36 
64 
72 
92 
02 
09 



AUGUST TOTAL 



10.30 



8.42 



9/3/90 
9/8/90 
9/10/90 
9/12/90 



08 
40 



05 
01 
03 
15 



SEPT. 1-14 TOTAL .48 

- No measurement of rainfall recorded 



.24 



42 



o 

© 

<N 

«— I 



VO 






< 
CQ 





CO 




> 


CM 


H 


CM 


OS 


U 


Q 


a 


pJ 


CQ 


u 


< 


H 


E-i 


fr. 




EH 




W 




U 




S 



0) 
O 



Eh 

Q 

8 

En 



O 



O 

i-t 

s 



00 



CD 
00 



CO 



00 
CN 



<N 

VO 



VO 
CN 



VO 



0> 

m 



i-H 


r- 








CN 


<N 


*r 






t-t 


i— t 


o 


.-h 


CO 


• 


• 


• 


r» 


ro 


O 


O 


^« 


• 


• 

o 


o 


vo 








^H 


m 


m 






i-H 


i— i 


CN 


o> 




• 


• 


• 


O 


l 



fN 



O 



00 



o 
m 
vo 





n 


CO 




o 


in 


o 


i-H 


i-t 


<* 


• 


• 



m 



oo 



oo 

ON 



O 
(N 



in 



m 



2 
O 
H 

Ei 
< 
Eh 
W 



ro 



in 



CO 
(N 



VO 
CO 



ro 



Lf> 



o 



VO 



in 



ro 



co 



CO 






r~ 






•<* 


in 




<-t 


<N 


CO 


• 


• 


•>» 



Ln 



o 




.-I 


CO 


CM 


in 


• 


• 


o 


t 


in 




i-4 


"» 


(N 


00 


• 


• 


O 


T 


00 




l-i 


VO 


fN 


CO 


• 


• 


o 


"* 


fN 




CO 


r* 


i-H 


o 



in 



en 



vo 
o 



in 



in 
ro 





i-H 


in 


o 




l-t 


i-H 


i-H 


i-H 


i-H 


"O" 


• 


• 


• 


^" 




o 


o 


T 


• 




oo 


vo 








IN 


ro 


i-H 




VO 


<-t 


--I 


O 


VO 


** 


• 


• 


• 


** 




o 


O 


TT 


• 



vo 
in 

CN 



in 

fN 



in 
ro 

fN 



o 



o 
^< 
ro 

fN 



o 

VO 

in 



co 

VO 
fN 



in 
o 
ro 



ro 
ro 



XI 


















p 




•a 
















o 






•* d) 




>i 








lu 















>i 






c 






iH O 




a> 






• 


0) 




OS 










0) 






<d 






a) c js 




•- > 




*. 


•H 


u 


(U 












> g 






u 






> OJ CJ 




u u 




00 


g 


p 


Eh 


0) 




73 






- u id 






CQ 






•H 3 C 




OJ 3 




o 




OJ -» 


2 


!h 




«H 


a> 




r» 3 0) 




0) 


vD 






a: <-{ m 




> U) 




Ct. 


!h 


Q4-«r 


5 





— > 


0) 


■H 




» • oi M 




i-H 


iH • 






VM W 




•H 




S 


0) 


3 • 




a 


m 


•H 


p — 




• CO P 




XI 


^ W 






•a c o 




a g 






> 


rH 


«> 


jC 


• 


VM 


P fN 




OS "4-1 01 




id 


•H 






.H 









M 


•H 


• fN 


• 


p 


CO 


P 


•H • 




0) Cu 




,-H 


> ••> 






OJ O C 




73 U 




m 


os 


•H 





<0 


i-H 


0) 


hH fN 




73 -H 3 




■H 


P O 






■H -H 




•H l*H 




0) 


>^ 


6 • 


U 


u 




0) 


i-H 




^H -H g 




id 


J3 • 






mw «J 




0) 




c 




•H 




p 


• 


2 


^ 




Q) SS id i-H 




> 


tnvo 






P S 




"*h E 






^ 


£ 


iH 


to 


•H 


— . 


0) . 




•H d) • 




id 


•H (N 


In 




a) 




VM (3 




cu 


0) 


Jf 


a> 




s 


»lO 


.H -H 




iw U M h 






c 


(V 




0J g 73 




■p a) 




Eh 


cr« 


M 


a u 




CU • 


O g 




P OJ P 




id 


m x • 


> 


m 


» S r-t 


o 


a m 




2 


n 


- 0) 


<a 


<d 


sh 


Eh O 


>i 


in 


01 > 01 73 




P 


en -h 


•H 


o 


a) oj 


i-H 


0) +J 


i-H 


2 


•H 


cu > 


cu 


0) 


d) 


S i-H 


O H 


o> 


OJ -H C C 


m 


id 


r» 5 6 OS 


00 


«. IH -H 


00 


S en 


O 




u 


Eh -H 




c 


> 


2 


•rH (1) 


r* 


S OS 5 <d 


fN 


-a 


-H 




i-H 


• p 4h 


i-H 


atu 


c 


CQ 


S OS 


0) 




•H 


• 


CQ > 


i-H 





Cx 




**<-* M 73 


=m 


U tn -p 


*ts 


"3 3: 







IS > -' 


u 


^ 


OS 


•a -h 


•H 


=*•= 


-T3 T3 CN 


S 





OJ 0> r-H 




nan 




• 




+J 


fN 










— ' 


•H g 


IT) OS 




• i-t <N 




z 


ja > 


(U 




3 d) 




u • 


c 


CP 


i-H 


r-i fN 


e 


o 




0) 


•H "^ 




M OJ • fci 


• 




•H 


•H 




a> 2 




CQ -H 





c 


rH 


^H i-H 


x: 





0) 


•H Ul 


^u 




CQ -H -H 2 


id 


i 


• M *w 




i-H • 




£ 


•H 


•H 


— > 


<D Cn 


p 


c 


en 


VM d) 




VW g 


p 




•H 


4-> 




73 -H .C 




■P 


4-» 


p 


• ^* 


CO » 


id 


13 


P > 


3 a) 




C P 


VI 




g | 


09 




73 g P 




m i-i 


(d 


c 


0) • 


in 


u 


M 


•H 


01 -H 


H > 




■f-i 01 fN <d 








a) 




•H -H 




0) • 


■p 


3 


4-> m 


3 *M 


p 





M 


a) os 


-H 




id oj • p u-i 




JTQ3 




SJT ? 




S rH 


w 


X 


OS fN 


os 


CO 


s 


CQ 


s ~ 


U OS 




X 2 ^h w 








43 



tn 

CN 

w 

< 
Eh 





w 








u 








e> 








9 








X 








u 








CO 








H 








Q 








Eh 




^-. 




Z 




T3 




a 




d) 
•P 




cu 






C 




^ 








Z 




a 


z 

H 


£ 




CO 
(1) 


w 


Eh 




1-1 


< 


< 




c 


X 

OS 
u 


x 


< 

Eh 

a 


3 
<0 


> 


a: 


•a 


H 


u 


o 

z 

M 

a 
< 
o 


"N. 


cd 


h 


m 




< 


.o 


Q 


» 


rH 


^ 


u 




U 


Eh 


c 


H 


w 


•H 


fc. 


4 




E-t 


5 




a 


W 






■M 


U 


a 




iH 


2 


z 




3 




< 




to 

0) 




% 




u 




s 




1-1 




H 




-* 




W 




•"^ 




z 








H 








o 








z 








H 








Eh 








W 








H 








X 








u 








o 








o\ 








ON 









CM 




VO 




o 




CN 




o 










i-t 


o 


vo 


o 


ro 




O 


CO 


CN 


vo 








"*N 


CM 


• 


CN 


.— 1 


1 


en 


r- 


T 


o 


O 






OV 


(N 


o 


CN 


CN 

VO 


o 

ON 


rn 


.— i 


i—l 


■— i 


ON 








in 




CN 


^> 


rH 


o 




CN 


tn 


o 


CN 


o 


00 


CM 


^ 


CO 


VO 


r~- 


CN 


<j\ 


00 


m 


o 


•—1 


•— i 


*»s 


rH 


t 


•-t 


o 


ro 


m 


CN 


ON 


CO 


^* 


u. 


It, 

s 


CO 


CN 


VO 

rH 


CN 


CN 


.— 1 

OV 


VO 


CN 


CN 


rt 


CN 


s 




CN 


r~» 


r- 


VO 


TT 


o 


<T> 




i—l 


T 








>4 


m 


• 


ro 


O 


CD 


r-» 


^H 


CO 


^H 


O 






vo 


CN 


o 


CN 


co 


m 


CN 


in 


m 


iH 


VO 





a, 





u 




O 


2 


x 


O 


< 


Eh 


X 


U 


u 


2 


co 


M 


M 


H 


a 



z 

D 
X 



CO 

o 
2 



CN 



O^ 



CO 



co 



CN 



VO 



O 

i— I 

o 



CN 



cn 



CO 
CO 



CN 
VO 



Z 

o 

M 
Eh 

< 
Eh 
W 



m 
i— i 
^h i i vo cn in t co 

• • • • • • ("SJ 

o r~ oo cn o in cn t 



vo 



cn 
co 

*T O 



cn 

I VO — I O 00 VO 

• T^ • • • • V^ 

n -H i-H o cn i-H rn 
on 



l I 



o 

I I I CN 



CN 






CO 


in cn 


en <t> cn 


co • 


en m i av 


• • • f - n 


T o 


t in — • 


ON ^ ON ^" 

cn 


rH 


o oo co 




in *» 


if) CN CO T 


m o 


CO • 


oo in co o 


H^HO 


cn in 


(NI/IOH 


m CN VO ^T 



oo r- -h in cn 
^* \o co in • • • o 

VincSOM>OHM 
<» CN 







E 






o 






o 






cn z C C cn ^h 






TJ 1 d) <1) 3 "*- 






•H ^H tj> D> 1_| g 


^-» 




r-H £ U 


CO 




o m U U -C 


U ^ OJ 




W T3 4J 4J CL4-I 


— o~ u 




r-l -H -H CO -H 


co +j -h «< 




"O 5)22 OH 


vw o E 




0) r-i | i £ 


O IflNX 




T3 X fO d) Cm U 


^ fci 01 




C -H 4-> 


*M fc, 




0) -H C CtJ r-H i-H 


5 5 O fo 


^am o u m m 


0— — 


Q 


CO +J E -P 4-> O 


r-H ^ 


O 


3 o e -h o a> 


U* b OX 


M Eh < Z Eh Ck 



I I I I I 



00 

I in co ov co on 
oo • oo • • <—* 
cn t en *r CN *H 
cn oo cn V 



cn co oo n m 

CA h I s ^ • • • 
•-h ^» t-H vo en <— I -H 



CN 






r-~ 






CN 


en 


o 


cn o 


o o 


•— • 1 


1 vo 


cn r*» 


CN 


r- 


00 


CN 


o 


rH 


o o 


o o 


• 






















O 




T CN 


o 


lD 


cn cn 


o 


o 


o 


o o 
V 


o o 
V V 


o 












CN 






f-t 


>-i in 


rH 






o 






O 


VO 


m 


r~ o 


rH O 


rH 1 


1 *3* 


1 rH 


r-i 


rH 


m 


O 


o 


o 


o o 


O O 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• r* 












o 


CN 


rH 


o 


<J\ 


rH cn 


o 


o 


o 


o o 


o o 



I I I 



I I I 



rH rH CN 
** O O *T O O O 

o in rH o o o o 
o o o o o o o 



l l I I I I I 



l l l l l l l 



l I I l I l 



I I I I 





s 






E 






3 






3 


E 




C 


U 




•H 


3 




•H 







E 


■H 


c 


£ 


Cm O TJ 





1 





3 


a c 


IT) 


U 


U r-t 


o -H 


(1) rC 


<tj 


H 


< U N 


rJ 


o 


u 



44 



Q 
W 
D 
2 
H 

z 
o 
u 



CM 

w 

CQ 



w w 
< 



g 

o 

s 

X 
E-" 

i 

E-" 
CO 



Cn 
E-t 



U 



•J 

a as 

u u 

CO CO 

CO H 

D Q 





CN 


co 




0^ 




o 














ft 


co vo 


n 


in 




CN 


VO 


^r 




o 


o cn «o CN 




•^ 


<N • 


CM 


r~ 


1 


m 


^H 


CN 


o 


in 


1 ^ CT» ^ • 




cn 


CM O 


CN 


in 


in 


^ 


CN 


VO 
VO 


VO 


o 


V 


^r 




If) CM 


VO 


m 


r^ 


.— i 


in 


^ 




o 




.— i 


CO 


VO <— 1 


VO 


CTV 


•3" 


^r 


VO 


r- 


CT\ 


o 




Cn 




*H • 


r-t 


r- 


r~- 


CN 


i—i 


o 


OS 


"3 1 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 


S 


00 


CN VO 
00 


CN 


<N 
<7\ 


ft 


m 


f->. 


^H 


VO 


<-i 






<N 


OV VO 


■-H 


r-» 


T 


^ 


o 


•^ 


OV 








\ 


co • 


** 


CN 


CN 


<N 


in 


o 


• 


o 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 




VO 


CM O 


CN 


T 


n 


^h 


rn 


VO 


vo 


00 





o 

i-H 

o 

■-H 

CN 

i-H 

CTv 



00 
00 



CN 

VO 



o 

ft 

o 
1-1 

CN 

i-H 
> v. 
CM 

CO 
V 

00 



CN 



Z 
O 

H 
Eh 

Eh 
CO 



W 
Eh 
U 



cm 



o 



o 



CO 



CN 



VO 

cn 



in 

CN 



in 









<T) 












^ CN 


CN 






VO 


T 


00 


m 




*» 


CN 


CN •-! O O 


o 


1 1 


1 


• 


• 


• 


• 


1 














m 


O 


<3« 


t 




CN 


in 


O -H O O 


o 






** 












ft 


V V V 


V 


^ 






















r- 






vo 


OV 


in 












1 r^ 


1 


t 


• 


• 


• 


o 


1 


1 


1 1 1 1 


1 


i-H 




r* 


CN 


i— I 
CN 


in 


CN 










■>* 












O 










VO 






"3" 


T 


VO 


O 










1 ft 


1 


CJ\. 


• 


• 


• 


O 


1 


1 


1 1 1 1 


1 


ft 




CN 


O 

V 


m 


in 


CN 










*r 






















*r 






















<T\ 


m 


<J\ 


•<* 


OV 


OV 












1 CN 


o 


9 


• 


• 


• 


O 


1 


1 


1 1 1 1 


1 


ft 


CN 


o\ 


o 
V 


<-> 


n 


CN 

V 











CO 
CN 



O 

co 



co o 
o\ o r- ^« o 

• • • a "^ 

CN O O i-H CN 

O 
O O 

^" ^ co a\ o 
• • • • i— i 

VO "» CN O <Ti 



co p~ cn o o o o 

CN O .-H ft © O O 

o o o o o o o 
V V 



I I I I I I I 



o 



o 
co cn in co oo 

co ft r~ o cn 
in -H 



I l 



l l 



CN 

in 

CN 



r~ o 

r~» co en © co o 

o 

cn r» vo o ft r» 



CNHO 
^r CN ^T O O O -H 
O CO O i-t o o o 

o o o o o o o 
V V 



ccj 

U ^ CO 



CQ Z 

TJ I 
•H ft 

r-t A 

cfl 



C C cn 

0) 0) 3 

cn & u 





^ o 
tn +j -h 
m o g 
o ca >«» 






CO Ti -P -P Q* 1 *-! 
f-t -H -H CO -H 



5 5 



ft ft 
Cn Cn 



73 CO 

CD t-i 

C 

oOj «3 

O 3 
O CQ CO Eh 



Cn 
Cn 



Z Z <H 

i i j: oh 

ccj CU Cn U g 

r!4J ^ 

C flriHO 

o m « mo 

g +J +J CJ rH 

g -H 0) 
3 Z Eh Cn 



g 
3 

C H 

•H CO 

C g Qi O T3 

o 3 a c co 

1-1 H -H CO 

m «j: u n j 



•H 3 
g-H 

i-i -9 

£ CO 

u o 



45 





o 


i-l 




•-h 


r* 




*■>, 


• 




o 


CO 




i-H 




a- 


CN 


en 


Eh 


i-h 


n 


2 W 


*>. 


• 


5 o 


on 


^S" 


cc 






Q 3 






►J X 






u u 




ON 


H CO 


00 


1- 


En M 




• 


H Q 


00 


•fl* 


CO 






W 






2 








r» 


i-l 




CN 


*» 



00 ON ON ON ON 

rrn in r> rofs . 
v a\ »o in o n h 



*-h o 

<N tj> VO CM 00 00 Tji 

• • ^3 • • • • • 

oot«-icnoooovo 



o m r- cm cm 

on ^ ^ --h on cm o on o co © o o 

mntNoco • -o 

neoHniNiowHnHOHOoo 
on in v V V 



o 

CM 

2 



a 
w 

D 
2 

H 
Eh 

§ 



co 

CM 

u 

CQ 



o 

i-H 

*»» 

O 
i-H 

CN 

i-H 
■X, 

on 



00 
CO 



CN 



W 



in co r- *r • co vo -n I i i i i i 

CO 



I I 



""S" CN on on 

oo\i^h(n(n r> r*- cnovoo 

^ v© in ^ co • • o • vo i • • • • 

(NinH^nr>HioHn .-h o cm o 
co vo 



l I 



l l l l I I l 



l l l l 





CN 


00 




l-H 


T 




V. 


o • 


cc 


on 


«» o 


u 






> 






H 






os 




so 


on 


00 


o m 


^H U 


'v 


vo • 


6u M 


CO 


co *r 


2 H 






Eh 






H 






►J 


r* 


00 




CM 


m m 



o 

-H 

o 



2 
O 

H 
EH 

< 

Eh 
CO 



— -t 


*T 


















in v© 


VO CN 




co co i-h co 




CN 


NO 








CM • 


CN CO 


1 


ON m CM CO 


I 


1 00 


co • 


CN 






CM O 


CM »H 
CM 


m 

o 


m i-H m i-H 

ON 




i-H 


r» co 


ON 


i-H 
V 


i-H 

V 


o •v 


00 \Q 


CM 


r~ in ^r i-h 






on r- 








O ON 


ON CM 


ON 


co m o o 


o 




in • 


CM 


CO 


T 


CN • 


•-< co 


00 


o vo in co 


00 


1 1 


ON CO 


O 


vo 


ro 


cm in 


cn in 


i-H 


•-H i-H VO i-H 


i-H 




CM CM 


T 


CM 


^H 

V 



m 

O V© 

■»* • 

CM O 



O 

mr> on o 

■-HTONO^H^rCO© 
'S' »* CM CM ^H — 1 • ^J 1 I 
CMinf-HONCOi-HVO-H 



l l l l l l l 



r~ O CM CM CO 

o co i r-~ -co • o i i i i i 

^r CO HMNO* 



I I I 



00 CO CM 
O »» TJ> TJ> co vo o 

vovor-'-HCOoococo 

n^HHinON-HH 



l I I I I I 



r~ o 



o co co 

cn vo «-i m t r-» o r-» co o o o © 
ooin^cM • <-> 'Ooi • o • • • • I 

VCOvOHinCNOH CMCMCNinOO 

rH CM CO V N/ 



00 
CO 



I I I I 



o 
o 

CM 



CO <-> VO CO CM 

o o o o o 



o o o o o 
V 



o 

V 







in 2 






T3 l 






•-I <-\ 


— . 




r-4 x: 


id 




flJ 


U _. CD 




CO T3 


~ 0«m U 




«-l 


m u -h < 




T3 <D 


*h o e 




(V t* 


O «J ^. x 




TJ X 


^tK O 




C 


4-1 Cn 




CO rH 


3 2 CJ Cn 


in Qi <Q 


•~~ 


Q 


01 •»-> 


i-H i-H 


O 


3 


Cn &* O CO 


CO Eh 




g 

3 
M -H 

<U £ 

aoT? o 
ac m u 

0-H 0)£ 



HfeH<ONjU 



g 

3 ^ 

•H CD 

•9 o 

U 2 



46 



* 
in 
cn 

2 



CN 



ON 



00 



CO 



VO 



Q 

U 

D 
Z 
H 

2 

o 
u 



co 

CN 

w 
►J 



* 
co 
cn 
fc. 
S 



CO 



CO 



CN 



VO 



CN 

vo in 

<N O 



in 

cn r» 

CN ^P 



CN 

r» vo 



n o 



o o o 

CN VO ^ CO 00 CO O 

VO ON I r~ CO *3« VO 'O' I 

CN CN CO CO r-( (N "3" 



I I 



I I I 



cn co in o 

ifflNinHCKTlO 
VOCNOONCO-HOOO 

co co on «-( r» vo cm o 

(NfOOOHHVOOIH 



CO 

ro m co cn 

p"» • p"» • co co 

nmmooHH 
^ r^ v 



vo r» 

co o cn ^ o co 

(NOHCOfmHO^fSClOICOajH 

H(MinHo<jomoo • o • • • 

(•JHHNlDHCMH^Hl/lr-IOO^Oin 



CN 


i-t 


CO 


in co 


— 1 


cn m 


r~ o 


r^ o co vo o 




in • 


in o\ 


1 r-t ON *T VO CO 


<T\ 


CN o 


CN CN 


H (\|Hi-(<J 



►J 



CN 

En 

3 



w 

Q 

o 



CN 



ON 



CO 



CO 



CN 



CO 

VO P» 

CO • 

CN "•» 



o • 

CO o 



o 

O CO o 

"d'CNcrvcocni'voo 

VOCNCOinr-fCNCNO 

cococNr»ocoinco 

CNCOCNr^^^J'i-t^H 



I I I I I I 



o 

VO CN 

CO CO VO —I CO 

in co vo in co 



CN 



VO ON O CO 

r> oo cm h a\ ooo vo cn in co on r» 

O^HCO^^I/lOCOO • ^* • • • 

com'd'cocOf-t'-tcocO'-icocovoco-H 

CN V 



r-» in 

• • 

a\ o 



co 

in 

r» • 

co ** 



in 

.-i o 



co 

• on 
on p~ 



co 

CO 



vo in 
r- »-i 



o 

«3" 



I I I 



CO 00 o 

cn o in o co o 

f» —• CO CN VO CN • o 
COiHCN'tfvO^O'-H 

vo 



I I I I I I I 



r» co cn r-* 

VOVOVOOCOCNTCOCNOO 
I I OA • • • VO ••#•••• 

CNP^COCOrHr^VOOtHOOO 

vo cn in 




a) £ m 





73 




a> 




p 




(0 




.-i 




d 




o 




<-{ 




(TJ 




U 




P 









c 




u 









T3 




<u 


cn 


p 


S 


u 





<u 


.-i 


<-i 


fc iH 







-a 


u 


a> 




4-> 


ItJ 


03 


p 


6 


ItJ 


•-I -o 


P 




cn 





W 


2 



47 



CN 

w 

a 
< 



< 

CQ 

OS 

u 
> 



o 

u 

H 

Cm 

£h 

w 
u 

s 



w 
u 

z 

H 

o 
<: 
o 

w 

s 

u 



Cm 
Eh 






E-« 

2 



z 

H 

Eh 
W 
M 
X 

w 

m 

CO 
ON 



73 
d) 

P 

o 

c 

a) 
id 

P 
a 

(V 

o 
x 



01 
>i 
(0 
73 

>1 
a> 
> 
u 

3 
09 



ON 
CM 



ID 



<D 
D> 

u 
a) 
> 
<d 

>i 
<d 

73 
09 



m 

s 

D 
O 

u 



o 

2 
X 
E-t 

i 

Eh 

05 



J 
U 
W 

(A 

D 
OS 



z 
o 

Eh 

e> oh 

Z Eh 



Eh 

z 

D 
X 



oo 

o 
cu 



z 
o 

H 
Eh 

Eh 
W 



rH O 

VO I I ON i— I VO O 

• p*» • • • • VQ 

o HioontNn 

V 



MflHOOHO 
CN O O r-l O O 



<r» t r* 
w o ^f r» (N inm o 
r-icN»-Hininr— *rcom 



I I I l l 



vo 


in 


oo 


1 0> 00 ON (*) 


• 


^ ON CO • • H VO 


n 


•-h ^ r^ cm •-• t on 




V 



I I 



VO 








CO 




CN 




i-H 


i cn in r» 


1—4 


00 o 


• 


r~ <n • • • vo 


Cu 


00 ("- ^" •—• ^f ^ 


o 


<-t n r» n in cm n 


S 


>-* ri n in n ro 




V 




V V V V V 



oo ^* in 
p> vom vo ri vovoo 



VO o 

ci r*^ 1 h fl v 

r-i <-• co in n m 

V V V V V 



vo 

o 



00 
00 —I o o 



O HH(J\OMfHO 

CN CN r-1 —t CO 



I I I I I I 



en 




cn oo en 


1 o 


r» r» <-• vo m 


r» t o 


00 00 H ^ tJ 


*3" i-H r-t 



I I I I 









O 








O 






en Z 


C C 0) ^h 






73 1 


d) d) 3 \ 






•H rH 


o> m i-i g 


-". 




<-i £. 


OOOCi 


id 




o <d 


M WX 


CD 




W 73 


p p avw 


-~ U 




•H 


•H -H W -H 


en < 




73 <D 


Z Z ^H 


<M 




<D •(-> 


i i s: o 


O X 




73 « 


(d a) a* u 


^ 




C 


•H P 


Cm 




a) rH 


C (CHH 


5 fe 


in Qj <fl 


u <d <d 


—• 


Q 


CQ J-> 


i p p o 


iH 


O 


3 


1 -H o <l> 


bOX 


W Eh 


-3 Z &H Cm 



e 

3 
C Sh 

e ao 
sac 



H 3 

£ 



H O 'H £ Ifl 



H<HUNOO 



48 



Q 

U 

D 
Z 

H 
EH 

Z 

o 

u 



CN 

pa 

CQ 



m 

CN 



m 




in oo 


CN 


O 00 


ON CN ON r-t 


Cn 


t m I 


1 i-H o o o 


s 


n m 


CM *» i-t CN 



CD 

iJ 
-H r4 
CN H 

fa a 

» 2 

w 

Q 

o 

fa 



O 

►J 

u 

H 

fa 
Eh 
w 



Eh 



ON 

fa 

3 



o 

CN 

fa 

3 



W 
> 

M 

OS 

U 
►J 
E-» 
Eh 
M 



z 
o 

H 
Eh 

Eh 
W 



ON ID CN CN o 

fno\ino>< i o\Ho 

<J , n*W^'H(N(NO 



ci in 
ry 00 



in n m 
V V V 



ON ON I I I I I I 



I I I 



V. O 

o o 

o o 

in o * 

o <-• cn v© o »o 

• I wt nonoonf i 

<» CNrH^TCNVOONONCN 



I I 



I I 



in 
r* on »h o 

cN«nr-cNr^'*oroo 

CNCNVOiHCOlOCNr^VO 



l l I 











-a 










<D 










p 










«J 










rH 




o 






3 


CN CI 


CO ON CO VO O 






O 


--H 1 CN 


r» ON • <*) CN "» 


I 


1 1 1 1 1 


r-i 


vo r» 


rH 

E 

o 
o 

01 Z C C 01 r-l 

TJ 1 d) OJ 3 "v. 

•H ^H ON CT> )-l g 






(0 

o 
■p 



c 
u 



•a 

0) 

p 
o 

<D 
>-i 


O 


— 


.H .C u 






p 


(0 


<fl ^4 U SZ 






<fl 


Q) 


W TJ -P -P CLM-I 






TJ 


— u 


r-l -H -H 01 -H 








a < 


TJ Q) Z Z rH 









<4H 


Q) t-> 1 1 J3 




g g 


z 


O X 


T3 t* <0 0) fa U 




3 3 g 




■^ 


C -HP 




C U -H 3 


1 


fa 


CJ) rH C (0 «H <-\ 




•H OJ g -H 




5 fa jiCu <T3 l-i (0 <T3 


C 


g a o o g 
3 a c n -3 




^Q 


01 P g 4-> P O 







rH O 


3 g -H <1> 


llH -H .C flj 




fa O»C0 


W Eh ^ Z Eh fa 


H 


<ONUU 





49 









S 






(0 

u 
> 

DC 

D 




•H 

iH 


u 






V) 


ft 




Z 


o 
o\ 


o 

fa 




H 


on 




W 


i-H 




CQ 


1 


T3 

c 




OJ 


in 


(0 


in 


> 


oo 
on 

fl 




<N 

U 


as 


Z 

o 


u 




J 


J 


w 


OQ 


u 


H 


a 
a> 
o 

X 

a) 


< 
Eh 


M 
fa 


a 




Eh 


Cm 




W 


s 




U 


o 




5 


o 




o 
o\ 


Eh 


• to 

ft 


• 


ON 
i-H 


3 


en 

E 






D 


C 
•H 






cc 

w 

Eh 
< 

2 


i-H 

3 
m 



a) 



in 

CN 
fa 

s 



n 

CN 

2 



o 
CN 
fa 
2 



on 

<-< 

2 



fa 
2 



oo 
o 

2 



Z 

o 

M 
Eh 
< 
£h 
W 



in 



o ro cm in vo 

avr^fivo'S'ficNCOONfir-oocn 

on • • cn cn mo • 

vo co Toooofiocnov 

-h m m 

in MflMNH 

eo^ni^oo^HiogvHri oon 

0>««CNcn«««««« o cn 

r- co cn o o o o cn o —i 



O NO VO VO >-H 

cjNvovocncNCOfir»voftcooor~ 

ON • • CN CN CO CN • 

NO f"* (NOOOOrHfMLTlOO 



in cn 

anjOH^mfNuofNiHio o^r 

ON •• CN cn O fl 

r»oo cn o o ft o ft <-t 

cn 



O NO CN ^H ON 

ONinoooNinTfiNor-or^oinoo 

on • • — • cn ^n 

vo co enooooovenvooo 

m 

fl oo o 

fiocNoor-cNcnofiin o 

• • CN CN CNl 

r>00 CN O O ft O VO oo 



O CO 


i— ( 


NO o o 


tji vo 


o 


o o o 


o o 


o 


o o o 


T* O 




tn cn «n 


CM —1 




o o o 


• • 


1 


• • • 


O O 




o o o 

V V V 



in *» ^h 

— t O O CN ft O 
CN NO O O O O 



m 
oo 

ON 



o 

on 

Ov 



in 
oo 

ON 



o 

ON 

On 



in 

CO 

o> 



o 

ON 
ON 



m 

CO 

ON 



o 

ON 
ON 



in 

CO 

ON 



CN 
CN 
fa 

2 



NO •-! cn r~ 
inooN"3'inocoNooinor~cn 

•1-HCN ON CN • 

noco cNOOOOin.-if-o 



in oo Ty 

lOflHONHHVOCOHUI NOO 

• CN CN VO • 

r»o> *y o o o o ft oon 



co vo cn in 
^•cococNini-HinooO'Hincoo 

* • i—{ m • • • • • . i — i ry • 

vor- cnoooocNfir-co 



VO ON *3» 

^^H^OH(Njoooin oo 

• •cncn in • 

r- r- cioooot-H cn r- 



r- co cn co 

MflCOMOO(N|lflHMnO<J 

• • »-h cn r~ in • 

voce cn o o o o co cot 



in in «— i oo 

inooovcoin'-H'-HONOin oo 

• •t-tCN i-H • 

r^co t-HoooocN f-n vo 



cn vo cn vo 
r^ooTCNOCNvoococooin 

••cncn on r- • 

voco mooooT ft in 



co m 

invoCNONTO'HONOO oo 

• CN CN O • 

r*-co cNOOOOfi i-ivo 



* * 

* * 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o o 

V 


VO 


o 




m 


CN CN 


CN 


fl 




o 


O O 


• 


• 


1 


• 


• • 


o 


o 




o 


O O 




V 




V 


V V 






m 


i-H 


ft ft 


m 


VO 


o 


m 


O O 


i— ( 


1— 1 


o 


o 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o o 
V V 



I I I I I 



00 ft fl 

cn oo o cn o o 
ft CO o o o o 

o o o o o o 
V V 



I I I I I I 





t in cn cn 




O ft o CO o o 




cn cn o o o o 




• ••••• 


vo 


o o o o o o 


i— 1 


V 


fa 




2 


VO o cn cn CN CN 




*» ft o o o o 



o o o o o o 
V V V V V 



vo vo ft cn 

CO CO O CN O O 

fl CN O O O O 

o o o o o o 



oo o cn cn CN CN 

O fl o o o o 

o o o o o o 

V V V V V 



I I I 



c 



u 

H 



u 
a> 

a o 
a c 

-H 
V N 



•H 3 

u •§ 
u u 



u 

0) 

J= 

4J 

CO 

d) 
2 

■p 

I 

oo 

^» 

CO 





o 




c 




•H 




*^ 




a 




a) 




4J 




«o 


• 


-a 


tn 




0) 


>i 


-p 


a> 


id 


> 


-a 


u 




3 


>i 03 


a> 




> CN 


u 


r-i 


3 ^v 


0) 


ON 


CN 


•» 


-H 


00 



ON CO 



• 


r» 


r>* 


Q) 


CN 


CN 


•P 


\ 


^. 


0) vo vo 


QiH-i nw 


E 


















d) 


a> 


c 


dn tn 


•H 


CO 


CO 




u 


u 


tn 


0) 


0) 


■H 


> 


> 


03 


(0 


CO 


>1 






ft 


to 


to 


CO 


E 


E 


c 


P 


U 


CO 










4-i 


<4-l 


XI 


■H 


•H 


CO ft ft 


■H 










CJ 


U 


u 






ft ft 




<0 


<a 


% 


o 


o 


(0 


a> 


a> 


*J 


fa 


fa 


(0 






T3 


o 


o 




ON 


ON 


OONON 


z 


i-H 


ft 


1 


* 


* 




* 


* 
* 



50 



TABLE 26 

19 9 WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN 

COMPARISON OF INSTREAM LOADINGS 1985 and 1990* (lbs/day) 



STATION: 


wfos 




WF10 




WF12 


WF14 


PARAMETER 


1985 


1990 


1985 




1990 


1985 


1990 


1985 


1990 


Flow (CFS)** 


87 


44 


317 




229 


318 


230 


319 


231 


BOD 5 


1,123 


562 


2,558 


2 


,589 


3,507 


3,960 


5,149 


5,019 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


- 


8.2 


51 




115 


342 


359 


275 


283 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


47 


67.7 


256 




901 


513 


495 


343 


614 


Total Kjeldhal-N 


459 


143 


1,535 




791 


2,053 


1,423 


1,527 


1,284 


Total Phosphorus 


14 


15 


136 




110 


86 


111 


68 


62 


Suspended Solids 


468 


237 


4,264 


3 


,809 


- 


- 


5,149 


3,241 


Chloride 


2,808 


- 


10,223 


8 


,624 


- 


12,374 


12,013 


9,942 


Iron 


- 


- 


136 




192 


188 


186 


- 


- 


Aluminum 


- 


- 


<170 




473 


<170 


470 


- 


240 


Copper 


- 


- 


<34 




17 


<34 


10 


- 


192 


Zinc 


- 


- 


<51 




64 


<40 


52 


- 


6 


Chromium 


- 


- 


<34 




1.3 


<34 


2.4 


- 


<1 


Cadmium 


- 


- 


<34 




1.3 


<34 


<1.2 


- 


7.2 



* 1990 data based on survey dates 6/27, 9/12. 
** Flow rep. average of 5/29/85, 7/17/85; 6/27/90, 9/12/90. 



51 



TABLE 26 (CONTINUED) 



STATION : 
PARAMETER 



WF19 
1985 1990 



WF2 
1985 1990 



WF2 3 



WF25 



1985 



1990 



1985 



Flow (CFS)** 42 

BOD 5 723 

Ammonia-Nitrogen 6.8 

Nitrate-Nitrogen 136 

Total Kjeldahl-N 199 

Total Phosphorus 32 

Suspended Solids 678 

Chloride 2,034 

Iron 

Aluminum - 

Copper 

Zinc - 

Chromium 

Cadmium 



44 
620 

16.4 
223 
145 

15.8 



322 
4,677 

364 

520 
1,871 

173 



646 11,295 
2,438 

32.7 

203 

2.0 
<0.03 
<0.03 



402 
1,098 
2,195 

201 



232 340 
3,634 

222 

835 

757 

105 
1,297 
10,360 25,458 

182 

73 
3.6 

<1 

<1 



284 343 

4,195 6,459 

320 314 

1,459 1,292 

1,028 1,772 

158 221 

4,129 5,905 15,10 

13,293 23,989 14,61 

443 

185 

<51 
<34 
<34 



* 1990 data based on survey dates 6/27, 9/12. 
** Flow rep. average of 5/29/85, 7/17/85; 6/27/90 9/12/90. 
- No data collected, or not calculated. 



52 



WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES DATA 



53 



TABLE 27(a) 



HUNTINGTON WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 



LOCATION: 
RECEIVING WATER: 
NPDES PERMIT NO. : 



Worthington Road, Huntington 
West Branch Westfield River 
MA0101265 



The Huntington WWTF is a 0.2 MGD facility which utilizes the carousel (oxidation 
ditch) variation of the extended aeration activated sludge process. The facility 
currently treats a domestic waste from the central village of Huntington although 
its design capacity will allow system expansion to cover a much larger portion 
of the town. Typical of such small oversized plants, the operator complains of 
such nuisance problems as excessively high aeration basin dissolved oxygen 
concentrations, old sludge, and difficulties in controlling chlorine dose. 
Results in mg/1 unless noted. 



PARAMETER 



6/27/90 



8/8/90 



9/12/90 



10/10/90 



Flow (MGD) 


0.107 


BOD 


150 


pH (Standard Units) 


6.7 


Total Alkalinity 


41 


Hardness 


39 


Suspended solids 


22 


Total Solids 


- 


Turbidity (NTU) 


4.4 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


2.2 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


0.04 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


6.4 


Total Phosphorus 


2.6 


Total Coliform/100 ml 


— 


Fecal Coliform/100 ml 


6,000 


Chloride 


36 


Iron 


0.07 


Manganese 


<0.02 


Aluminum 


0.73 


Copper 


0.15 


Zinc 


0.06 


Lead 


<0.002 


Chromium 


0.002 


Cadmium 


0.004 


Nickel 


0.003 


silver 


<0.001 


Mercury 


- 


REMARKS 





0.136 

11 

6.4 

21 

30 

14 

210 

5.6 

3.5 

0.96 

9.0 

3.7 

110,000 

8,100 

42 



0.112 

21 

6.6 

21 

39 

242 

1.9 
0.16 
15 
2.6 

40 
37 
0.05 

0.10 

0.09 

0.114 
<0.002 
<0.001 

0.006 
<0.002 

<0.0002 



0.117 

27 

6.7 

43 

31 

6.5 



1 
3 

8 
3 



1 

8 

43 

7 

8 



<20 
34 

0.04 
0.011 
0.05 
0.15 
0.04 

<0.002 



<0 
<0 
<0 
<0 



001 
001 
002 
001 



Graphite Furnace 
- No measurement taken 



54 



TABLE 27(b) 



RUSSELL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 



LOCATION : 
RECEIVING WATER: 
NPDES PERMIT NO: 



Grove Street, Russell 
Westfield River 
MA0100960 



Located just downstream of the Russell Falls Dam, this extended aeration facility 
is one of the oldest activated sludge secondary treatment facilities in Western 
Massachusetts . 

This facility is being replaced by a new facility near the site. The new 
facility will be an Innovative Technology Advanced Plant, with Interchannel 
Clarifier & Oxidation Ditch, 0.1 MGD dry and 0.2 MGD wet weather flow. The plant 
is expected to be on line by June 15, 1991. The 30 BOD, 30 mg/1 solids permit 
limit is expected to be met. Results in mg/1 unless noted. 



PARAMETER 


6/27/90 


8/8/90 


9/12/90 


10/10/90 


Flow (MGD) 


0.106 


0.139 


0.094 


0.129 


BOD 


160 


54 


42 


* 


pH (Standard Units) 




6.8 


6.8 


7.07.2 


Total Alkalinity 


54 


49 


53 


74 


Hardness 


32 


65 


32 


33 


suspended Solids 


2.0 


78 


- 


* 


Total Solids 


- 


270 


180 


6.6 


Turbidity (NTU) 


1.3 


5.7 


- 


- 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


5.4 


15 


8.8 


4.2 


Ammonia-N 


5.1 


10 


6.0 


0.11 


Nitrate-N 


0.05 


0.37 


3.1 


0.97 


Total Phosphorus 


1.0 


3.8 


1.2 


2.1 


Fecal Coliform/100 ml 


7,000 


- 


91,000 


240 


Chloride 


33 


27 


28 


- 


Iron 


<0.03 


- 


- 


0.34 


Manganese 


<0.02 


- 


- 


0.028 


Aluminum 


0.61 


- 


- 


0.10 


Copper 


0.03 


- 


- 


0.28 


Zinc 


0.07 


- 


- 


0.16 


Lead 


<0.002 


— 


— 


<0.002 


Chromium 


<0.001 


— 


- 


0.001 


Cadmium 


0.008 


— 


- 


<0.001 


Nickel 


<0.002 


- 


- 


0.030 


Silver 


<0.001 






<0.001 



* Analysis could not be completed 
- No measurement taken. 



55 



TABLE 27(c) 



STRATHMORE PAPER COMPANY WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 



LOCATION: 
RECEIVING WATER: 
NPDES PERMIT NO. : 



Valley View Avenue, Woronoco section of Russell 

Westfield River 

MA0004995 



In its Woronoco Mills complex, the Strathmore Paper Company operates what is 
reputed to be the largest paper mill in Massachusetts. Wastewater from the 
complex is treated via a chemically enhanced primary sedimentation process, 
before discharging to the Westfield River. Results in mg/1 unless noted. 



PARAMETER 


6/27/90 


8/8/90 


9/12/90 


10/10/90 


Flow (MGD) 


2.62 


2.72 


2.71 


2.89 


COD 










BOD 


600 


52 


81 


* 


pH (Standard Unit) 


6.6 


6.9 


7.4 


6.7 


Total Alkalinity 


31 


31 


55 


45 


Hardness 


61 


125 


121 


179 


Suspended Solids 


9.5 


- 


- 


# 


Total Solids 


- 


270 


400 


— 


Turbidity (NTU) 


11 


11 


- 


4.1 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


0.46 


1.3 


3.4 


2.1 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


<0.02 


<0.02 


0.12 


0.02 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


0.09 


0.24 


1.00 


0.22 


Total Phosphorus 


0.18 


0.27 


0.25 


0.20 


Total Coliform/100 ml 


— 


70,000 


— 


— 


Fecal coliform/100 ml 


<20 


2,000 


20 


— 


chloride 


39 


36 


2 


34 


Iron 


- 


- 


- 


0.11 


Manganese 


- 


— 


— 


0.017 


Aluminum 


— 


— 


— 


0.70 


Copper 


- 


- 


- 


<0.01 


Zinc 


- 


— 


- 


0.05 


Lead 


— 


— 


— 


<0.002 


Chromium 


— 


— 


— 


<0.001 


Cadmium 


— 


— 


— 


<0.001 


Nickel 


— 


— 


— 


<0.002 


silver 








<0.001 



* Analysis could not be completed. 
- No measurement taken. 



56 



TABLE 27(d) 



WESTFIELD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 



LOCATION: 
RECEIVING WATER: 
NPDES PERMIT NO. : 



Neck Road, Westfield 
We9tfield River 
MA0101800 



This facility receives a mixed domestic/commerical/industrial waste from the city 
of Westfield. Treatment is accomplished via a mechanically mixed conventional 
activated sludge treatment system before discharge to the Westfield River. 
Typical of older urban communities, the facility was subject to significant 
infiltration/inflow hydraulic overloading. Over the past five years, sewer line 
rehabilitation in parts of the system have dramatically lowered the I/I problem. 
In the past, the facility has also been subject to slugs of wastes with unusual 
pH values. Recent changes in the city's sewer use code have mitigated much of 
this problem. Results in mg/1 unless noted. 



PARAMETER 


6/27/90 


8/8/90 


9/12/90 


10/10/90 


Flow (MGD) 


3.14 


3.78 


3.04 


3.34 


BOD 


240 


15 


35 


47 


pH (Standard Units) 


7.5 


7.5 


7.2 


7.1 


Total Alkalinity 


130 


114 


112 


130 


Hardness 


61 


66 


53 


79 


Suspended Solids 


5.5 


2.5 


- 


33 


Total Solids 


- 


270 


240 


- 


Turbidity (NTU) 


5.0 


3.0 


- 


7.0 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


27 


9.4 


13 


29 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


14 


1.22 


12 


17 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


1.57 


13 


1.15 


1.61 


Total Phosphorus 


2.6 


1.4 


2.4 


3.6 


Total Coliform/100 ml 


- 


84,000 


- 


— 


Fecal Coliform/100 ml 


60 


110 


<10 


— 


Chloride 


59 


59 


42 


48 


Iron 


— 


- 


0.13 


0.41 


Manganese 


- 


- 


0.13 


0.04 


Aluminum 


- 


— 


0.08 


0.22 


Copper 


- 


- 


<0.002 


0.50 


Zinc 


— 


- 


0.055 


0.13 


Lead 


— 


— 


0.003 


0.011 


Chromium 


— 


— 


<0.001 


0.44 


Cadmium 


— 


— 


<0.001 


0.04 


Nickel 


— 


— 


0.002 


0.32 


silver 






<0.0002 


0.003 



- No measurement taken 



57 



TABLE 27(e) 

COLUMBIA MANUFACTURING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 

LOCATION: Cycle Road, Westfield 

RECEIVING WATER: Little River 
NPDES PERMIT NO.: MA0001571 

Columbia Manufacturing is a long standing manufacturer of bicycles (having 
recently celebrated its centennial anniversary) and other metal products. 
Wastewater from its metal finishing operations is treated by means of the Lancy 
System. This involves chemical precipitation of metal hydroxides followed by 
pH adjustment prior to discharge. The effluent is discharged to the Little River 
off South Meadow Road. Sludge from the treatment system is dewatered by means 
of a plate and platten filter press and disposed of in a controlled landfill in 
upstate New York. All results in mg/1 unless noted. 

PARAMETER 10/10/90 

Flow (MGD) 0.102 

BOD 10 

pH (Standard Units) 6.3 

Total Alkalinity 15 

Hardness 11 

Suspended Solids <1.0 
Turbidity (NTU) 0.7 

Total Kjeldahl-N 0.86 

Ammonia-Nitrogen 0.05 

Nitrate-Nitrogen 0.59 

Total Phosphorus 0.17 

Chloride 12 

Iron 0.14 

Manganese 0.007 

Aluminum <0.05 
Copper 0.23 

Zinc 0.12 

Lead <0.002 
Chromium 0.10 

Cadmium <0.001 
Nickel 0.05 

Silver <0.001 



58 






TABLE 28(a) 

HUNTINGTON WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 

AVERAGE COMPARISON OF LABORATORY RESULTS 19 85 AND 19 9 

(All results in mg/1, unless otherwise noted) 









LIMITS 








AVG. DAY 


MAXIMUM 


PARAMETER 


1985 


1990 


(Monthly) 


Daily 


Flow (MGD) 


0.106 


0.115 






BOD 


21 


52 


30 


50 


pH (Standard Units) 


6.0 


6.5 


— 


— 


Total Alkalinity 


7.5 


32 


- 


- 


Hardness 


— 


35 


— 


— 


Suspended Solids 


21 


14 


30 


50 


Total Solids 


282 


226 


— 


— 


Turbidity (NTU) 


- 


3.6 


- 


- 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


9.8 


2.9 


- 


- 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


0.18 


0.40 


- 


- 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


17.0 


10.0 


— 


— 


Total Phosphorus 


15.0 


2.3 


— 


— 


Total Coliform/100 ml 


150/930 


— 


— 


— 


Fecal Coliform/100 ml 


<36 


34/42 


200/100ml 


400/100ml 


Chloride 


27 


37 


- 


— 


Iron 


0.30 


0.04 


— 


— 


Manganese 


<0.02 


0.02 


- 


- 


Aluminum 


0.13 


0.29 


- 


— 


Copper 


0.12 


0.13 


- 


- 


zinc 


0.13 


0.07 


— 


— 


Lead 


0.04 


<0.002 


— 


— 


Chromium 


<0.02 


<0.002 


— 


— 


Cadmium 


<0.02 


<0.001 


— 


— 


Nickel 


<0.02 


0.003 


— 


- 


Silver 


<0.02 


<0.002 


- 


— 


Mercury 


- 


<0.0002 


- 


- 



59 



TABLE 28(b) 

RUSSELL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 

AVERAGE COMPARISON OF LABORATORY RESULTS 19 85 AND 19 9 

(All results in mg/1, unless otherwise noted) 












LIMITS 








AVG . DAY 


MAXIMUM 


PARAMETER 


1985 


1990 


(Monthly) 


Daily 


Flow (MGD) 


0.108 


0.140 




. 


BOD 


17 


85 


30 


50 


pH (Standard Units) 


6.7 


6.9 


— 


- 


Total Alkalinity 


54 


51 


- 


- 


Hardness 


- 


43 


- 


- 


Suspended solids 


32 


38 


30 


50 


Total Solids 


207 


152 


- 


- 


Turbidity (NTU) 


- 


3.5 


- 


- 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


7.0 


8.3 


- 


- 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


3.3 


5.3 


- 


- 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


0.7 


1.1 


- 


- 


Total Phosphorus 


2.6 


4.0 


- 


- 


Fecal Coliform\100 ml 


<36/36 


82 


200/100ml 


400/100ml 


Chloride 


39 


39 


- 


- 


Iron 


0.38 


0.15 


- 


- 


Manganese 


<0.02 


0.02 


- 


- 


Aluminum 


0.13 


0.35 


- 


- 


Copper 


0.04 


0.16 


- 


- 


Zinc 


0.08 


0.13 


- 


- 


Lead 


<0.04 


<0.002 


- 


- 


chromium 


<0.02 


<0.001 


- 


- 


Cadmium 


<0.02 


0.003 


- 


- 


Nickel 


— 


0.015 


- 


— 


Silver 


<0.02 


<0.001 


— 


— 






60 



TABLE 28(C) 

STRATHMORE PAPER COMPANY WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 

AVERAGE COMPARISON OF LABORATORY RESULTS 1985 AND 1990 

(All results in mg/1 unless otherwise noted) 



PARAMETER 



1985 



1990 



LIMITS (lbs) 
AVG . DAY MAXIMUM 
(Monthly) Daily 



Flow ((MGD) 

BOD (lbs /day) 

Total Alkalinity 

Hardness 

Suspended Solids (lbs/day) 

Total Solids 

Total Kjeldahl-N 

Ammonia-Nitrogen 

Nitrate-Nitrogen 

Total Phosphorus 

Total Coliform/100 ml 

Fecal Coliform/100 ml 

Chloride 

Iron 

Manganese 

Aluminum 

Copper 

Zinc 

Lead 

chromium 

Cadmium 

Nickel 

Silver 



2.53 

72 (973) 

6.6 

30 

24 (340) 

375 

3.5 

0.14 

0.2 

0.34 

430/150 
<36/<36 

63 

1.26 

0.08 

1.6 

0.02 

0.06 
<0.04 
<0.02 
<0.02 
<0.05 
<0.02 



2.86 

244 (3,754) 1,300 

6.8 

41 

9.5 (146) 724 

340 

1.8 



2,050 



1,448 







7, 



23 
39 
33 

000 



680 
31 

0.11 





<0 

<0 
<0 
<0 
<0 
<0 



017 

70 

01 

05 

002 

001 

001 

002 

001 



200 count/400 max 
400 max 



0.08 
0.15 



61 



TABLE 2 8 (d) 

COLUMBIA MANUFACTURING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 

AVERAGE COMPARISON OF LABORATORY RESULTS 1985 AND 1990 

(All results in mg/1 unless otherwise noted) 



PARAMETER 



1985 



1990 



LIMITS 
AVG. DAY MAXIMUM 
(Monthly) Daily 



Flow (MGD) 

BOD 

pH (Standard Units) 

Total Alkalinity 

Hardness 

Suspended Solids 

Turbidity (NTU) 

Total Kjeldahl-N 

Ammonia-Nitrogen 

Nitrate-Nitrogen 

Total Phosphorus 

Chloride 

Iron 

Manganese 

Aluminum 

Copper 

Zinc 

Lead 

Chromium 

Cadmium 

Nickel 

Silver 



0.40 


0.046 


— 


— 


10 


— 


7.4 


6.3 


— 


41 


15 


— 


— 


11 


— 


6 


<1.0 


20. 


— 


0.7 


— 


2.1 


0.86 


— 


0.04 


0.05 


— 


1.1 


0.59 


- 


0.61 


0.17 


— 


25 


12 


— 


0.81 


0.14 


2.00 


0.02 


0.007 


— 


0.15 


<0.05 


- 


0.04 


0.23 


— 


0.57 


0.12 


1.50 


0.04 


<0.002 


— 


0.21 


0.10 


0.05 


<0.02 


<0.001 


— 


0.44 


0.05 


2.35 


<0.002 


<0.001 


— 



30. 



3.00 

0.17 
2.00 

0.10 

3.00 



62 



L 



TABLE 2 8 (e) 

WESTFIELD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY 

AVERAGE COMPARISON OF LABORATORY RESULTS 1985 AND 1990 

(All results in mg/1 unless otherwise noted) 









LIMITS 










AVG . DAY 


MAXIMUM 


PARAMETER 


1985 


1990 


(Monthly) 


Daily 


Flow (MGD) 


2.61 


3.35 






BOD 


11.75 


84.25 


30 


50 


pH (Standard Units) 


7.0 


7.3 


— 


- 


Total Alkalinity 


103 


123 


- 


- 


Hardness 


- 


65 


- 


- 


Suspended Solids 


6.3 


13.6 


30 


50 


Total Solids 


266 


255 


- 


- 


Turbidity (NTU) 


- 


5.0 


- 


- 


Total Kjeldahl-N 


20 


19 


- 


- 


Ammonia-Nitrogen 


9 


11 


- 


- 


Nitrate-Nitrogen 


2.9 


4.3 


- 


- 


Total Phosphorus 


4.5 


2.5 


- 


- 


Total Coliform/100 ml 


120,000/ 
930,000 


84,000 


— 


— 


Fecal Coliform/100 ml 


450,000/ 


55 


200 


400 


Chloride 


41 


52 


— 


- 


Iron 


<0.04 


0.27 


- 


- 


Manganese 


0.04' 


0.04 


- 


- 


Aluminum 


0.13 


0.16 


- 


- 


Copper 


0.04 


0.25 


- 


- 


Zinc 


0.07 


0.09 


- 


- 


Lead 


0.008 


<0.04 


- 


- 


Chromium 


0.03 


0.22 


- 


- 


Cadmium 


<0.02 


0.02 


- 


- 


Nickel 


0.09 


0.16 


- 


- 


silver 


<0.50 


0.003 


- 


- 


Mercury 


- 


<0.0002 


- 


- 



63 



WESTFIELD RIVER BASIN. DESCRIPTION OF WATERSHED 

The Westfield River Basin covers 517 square miles of west-central Massachusetts 
and includes portions of Franklin, Hampden, and Berkshire counties. Sparsely 
populated in the upper reaches, the basin's population is concentrated in the 
southeastern corner in the municipalities of Agawam, Holyoke, westfield, and west 
Springfield. 

The Westfield River begins in Savoy at a point over 2,000 feet above mean sea 
level. Flowing southeast, with ridges rising 500 to 900 feet above the adjacent 
valleys, the river remains mostly in its natural state, surrounded by second- 
and third-growth forest cover. Dropping 1,000 feet in the first 14 miles, the 
river swiftly makes its way to Huntington where it is joined by the Middle and 
West Branches. 

The Middle Branch of the Westfield River begins in the town of Peru and flows 
18 miles to join the main branch 27 miles above its mouth. Falling 1,250 feet 
along its course, the Middle Branch has a drainage area of 52.6 square miles and 
an average flow of 102 cfs at the United States Geological Survey gage just above 
its confluence with the main branch. 

In Becket, the West Branch of the Westfield River is formed by the confluence 
of Depot and Yokum Brooks. This branch flows 17.5 miles through Becket, 
Middlefield and Chester, falling 840 feet before joining the Main Branch in 
Huntington 25 miles above its mouth. At the United States Geological Survey gage 
1.5 miles upstream of its confluence, the West Branch has an average flow of 182 
cfs and drains an area of 93.7 square miles. 

Below Huntington, the river flows over three dams in succession and the river 
slope decreases as it approaches the town of Westfield. The Westfield River is 
joined by the Little River 11 miles above its mouth, just as the river is 
reaching the floodplain of the Connecticut River. The river deepens and winds 
its way through Robinson State Park and over one more dam in West Springfield 
before it joins the Connecticut River. The average flow of the Westfield at its 
confluence with the Connecticut River is 930 cfs. 

Pollution in the Past 

The total population residing in the Westfield River Basin during the post-World 
War II boom years grew from 65,000 in 1950 to 83,500 in 1960. By 1970, it 
totaled 106,845, with the largest growth occurring along the lower main stem. 
By the mid-1980 's, growth had slowed, but the total was approximately 122,000. 

By the late 1960 's, hundreds of people, including an overflow of workers from 
urban areas along the lower Connecticut River Basin to the east, had found jobs 
in three paper mills located on the main stem, an abrasives manufacturer on the 
lower West Branch at Chester, another paper mill and a metal-finishing plant on 
the Little River near Westfield, and a radiator plant on Powder Mill Brook, (a 
small tributary which enters the main stem at the city of Westfield) . 

These industries discharged suspended solids, organic wastes, process dyes which 
discolored the water, chromium, aluminum, zinc, lead and cyanides into the 
westfield main stem. In addition, the main stem received untreated municipal 
wastes discharged directly into the river at Huntington, untreated wastes 
discharged from combined sewers directly to these waters at Agawam and Westfield, 
and wastes from an overloaded sewage treatment plant in the Town of Russell. 

According to a Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution Control (DWPC) 
spokesman: "By 1972, the pollution loading placed on the Westfield River's main 
stem in terms of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) - a measure of the organic 



64 



matter in water which consumes oxygen during biological processes that break it 
down - was 12,000 pounds per day, or the equivalent of an untreated sewage load 
produced in one day by a city with a population of 78,000 m1 . 

"As far back as the 1950 's," the spokesman continues, "the state rated the main 
stem from Huntington to Westfield, and the lower West Branch near Huntington as 
Class D streams, fit only for commerce and navigation. The main stem from 
Westfield to the Connecticut River was in an even worse condition: a class U 
waterway, the equivalent of an open sewer." 

"This gross pollution killed fish. Anglers avoided the river. Soon, only trash 
fish - carp and suckers - were left, and from the City of Westfield down to the 
Connecticut River, bloodworms - creatures that live without oxygen, indicators 
of gross pollution - thrived in great numbers. Boating declined and rafts of 
paper mill sludge floated downstream, degrading the shoreline, offending local 
residents with the stink of nuisance odors. These conditions were particularly 
bad along the shores of Robinson State Park at Agawam and Westfield." 

"There was still another, serious environmental problem," the spokesman 
emphasizes. "Fecal coliform bacteria counts - a measure of bacterial pollution 
from human and animal wastes - posed a health hazard. In 1972, fecal coliform 
bacteria counts recorded by the DWPC at the City of Westfield reached 430,000 
organisms per 100 milliliters (ml). The state water quality standard for this 
portion of the Westfield River is 200 fecal organisms per 100 ml." 



"Information and quotations taken largely out of U.S. EPA, office of Water 
Planning and Standards Bulletin Sept. -Oct. 19 80 A Water Quality Success 
Story . " 



65 



WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS 

The timing for the 1990 Westfield River Survey in June - September, conformed 
with average seasonal low flow conditions on June 27 and September 19 surveys. 
However, the area was subjected to a heavy rainfall period, prior to and just 
after, the August 8 survey (see Table 21). Flows of June 27 and September 19 
surveys ranged between 114-339 cfs along the gauged portion of the Westfield 
River main stem, and on August 8, flows ranged from 1630-2340 cfs along the main 
stem (Table 22). Flows on the special survey date, October 10, seemed to 
approximate June 27 and September 19 flow levels. 

Analysis from data collected, plus comparison with prior year's survey data 
(particularly the 19 85 Westfield River water Quality Report) indicates that water 
quality conditions remain largely unchanged from five years ago. 

The 1990 conditions essentially meet Class "B" water quality standards, except 
there continues to be continual fecal coliform problems on the lower portions 
of the Westfield (from station WF21 river mi. 10.1, to Connecticut River 
confluence), and fecal coliform problems throughout the basin during high 
rainfall - runoff periods. 

visual signs throughout the survey period did not indicate eutrophic or 
mesotrophic conditions anywhere on the Westfield main stem or its tributaries. 
This includes considerable visual inspection of waters behind the impoundment 
at the Strathmore Bridge (mile 19.5). No algal blooms were spotted in these 
waters at any time during the survey period. 

Dissolved oxygen levels . (Tables 4, 5; Figure 5) were consistently above the 
Class "B" standard of 5.0 mg/1 throughout the basin areas surveyed. Biochemical 
oxygen demand (Table 6; Figure 6, 9)) ranged from 2.4-7.2 mg/1 on June 27; 2.4- 
15 mg/1 on August 8; and 1.8-4.8 mg/1 on September 19. Translated into lbs/day, 
BOD instream loadings (Table 22), the ranges on June 27 were from 3,047-12,086 
lbs/day along the Westfield main stem, 852 lbs/day from the Little River (near 
the Westfield River confluence); on August 8, the ranges were from 20,646-53,262 
lbs/day along the main stem, 4,648 lbs/day from the Little River, and 1,123 
lbs/day from Powdermill Brook; on September 12, the ranges were from 1,824-5,759 
lbs/day in the main stem, 387 lbs/day from the Little River, and 79 lbs/day from 
Powdermill Brook. There appears to be especially high BOD loadings following 
heavy rainfall events and less significant loadings during drier periods. BOD 
loadings ranged, during the survey period from 7-93.6 lbs/day at the Huntington 
WWTP from 30.7-215.2 lbs/day at the Russell WWTP, and from 387-5694 lbs/day at 
the Westfield WWTP [Figure 12; Tables 27(a)-(d)]. 

Nutrients (e.g., phosphorus, nitrogen) [Tables 7-12], stimulate plant and algal 
growth under appropriate conditions. No significant visible evidence of this 
was seen during the survey period. On June 27 total calculated phosphorus 
instream loadings (from Tables 10, 11, 12, 23) ranged from 60-201 lbs/day along 
the Westfield mainstem, 20 lbs/day from the Little River, and 3.6 lbs/day from 
Powdermill Brook; on August 8, it ranged from 699-2,789 lbs/day along the 
mainstem, and 136 lbs/day in the Little River, and 60.8 lbs/day in Powdermill 
Brook; on September 12, it ranged from 60-268 lbs/day along the mainstem, and 
10.8 lbs/day from the Little River, and 15 lbs/day from Powdermill Brook. Total 
Phosphorus loadings during the survey period ranged from 1.5-3.8 lbs/day from 
the Huntington WWTP, 0.90-2.8 lbs/day from the Russell WWTP, and 3.6-71.9 lbs/day 
from the Westfield WWTP [Tables 27(a)-(d)]. 

Total Kieldahl-Nitrogen (TKN) Loadings , [Tables 7-9, 23; Figures 11, 13] June 
27, ranged from 279-2,182 lbs/day along the Westfield mainstem, 121 lbs/day from 
the Little River, and 29 lbs/day from Powdermill Brook; on August 8, it ranged 
from 5,241-11,955 lbs/day along the Westfield mainstem, 1141 lbs/day from the 
Little River, and 425 lbs/day from Powdermill Brook; on September 12, it ranged 
from 593-1320 lbs/day along the Westfield mainstem, 170 lbs/day from the Little 
River, and 33 lbs /day from Powdermill Brook. TKN loadings during the survey 
period ranged from 1.1-2.7 lbs/day from the Huntington WWTP, 2.9-11.2 lbs/day 



66 



from the Russell WWTP, 9.9-45.6 lbs/day from the Strathmore WWTP, 242-641 lbs/day 
from the Westfield WWTP [Tables 27(a)-(d)]. 

Ammonia-Nitrogen Loadings . [Tables 7-9, 23] on June 27, ranged from 51-501 
lbs/day along the Westfield mainstem, 15.5 lbs/day from the Little River, and 
7.6 lbs /day from Powdermill Brook; on August 8, it ranged from 1,017-1,781 
lbs/day along the Westfield mainstem, 58 lbs/day from the Little River, and 6.6 
lbs/day from Powdermill Brook; on September 12, it ranged from 133-339 lbs /day 
along the Westfield mainstem, 17.2 lbs/day from the Little River, and 4.7 lbs /day 
from Powdermill Brook. Ammonia Nitrogen Loadings [Tables 27(a)-(l)] during the 
survey period ranged from .03-. 27 lbs/day from the Huntington WWTP, .08-7.5 
lbs/day from the Russell WWTP, and 31.4-339 lbs/day from the Westfield WWTP 
[Tables 27(a)-(d) ] . 

Nitrate-Nitrogen Loadings , [Tables 7-9] on June 27, ranged from 381-1,494 lbs/day 
along the Westfield mainstem, was 214 lbs/day from the Little River, and 68.6 
lbs/day from Powdermill Brook; on August 8, ranged 2,982-6,613 lbs/day along the 
Westfield mainstem, 988 lbs/day from the Little River, and 420 lbs/day from 
Powdermill Brook; on September 12, ranged 521-1480 lbs/day along the Westfield 
mainstem, 232 lbs/day from the Little River, and 76 lbs/day from Powdermill 
Brook. Nitrate-Nitrogen Loadings [Tables 27 (a) -(1) during the survey period 
ranged from 3.8-9.1 lbs /day from the Huntington WWTP, .07-2.3 lbs /day from the 
Russell WWTP, 1.9-21.9 lbs/day from the Strathmore WWTP, and 32-335 lbs/day from 
the Westfield WWTP [Tables 27(a)-(d)]. 

Algal and Chlorophyll a Counts , [Table 20] according to Table 19, are quite low 
throughout the basin during the survey period. 

Suspended Solids Loadings . [Tables 10-12, 23; Figure 14] on June 27, ranged 
from 3241-15,107 lbs/day on the mainstem of the Westfield River, and 646 lbs/day 
from the Little River tributary. On August 8, loadings were very high (following 
heavy rainfall): on June 27, loadings ranged from 89,028-228,930 lbs/day along 
the Westfield mainstem. Suspended solids loadings during the survey period 
ranged from 4.3-14 lbs/day from the Huntington WWTP, 2.7-58.3 lbs/day from the 
Russell WWTP, 205 lbs/day from the Strathmore WWTP, and 659-1701 lbs/day from 
the Westfield WWTP [Tables 27(a)-(d)]. Chloride Levels [Tables 10-12] ranged 
between 4-29 mg/1 throughout the entire basin survey period. Fecal Coliform 
Bacteria . [Tables 10, 13; Figure 10] throughout the survey, levels frequently 
did not meet Massachusetts Water Quality Standards (200 mg/1 100 ml) on the lower 
portions of the Westfield River mainstem and tributaries (WF 19, 20-25 incl. 
Little River and Powdermill Brook) . Levels on this lower Westfield portion 
ranged between 60-14,000 during the entire survey period, with an average of 
3,165 org./lOO ml for all stations and dates surveyed. 

On June 27, the levels upstream (Stations WF08-WF14) on the main stem, plus the 
West Branch, ranged between 60-200 org./lOO ml; on August 8, (just following a 
heavy rain event), levels ranged between 400-14,000 org./lOO ml; on September 
12 levels ranged between 40-150 org./lOO ml; on October 12, the level at WF12 
was 600 org./lOO ml. During wet weather flow periods, the mid and upper portions 
of the basin tend not to meet fecal coliform standards. It should be 
particularly noted that fecal coliform counts at, and just downstream (WF.12) 
from the Russell WWTP, ranged 80-14,000 org./lOO ml (average 3,800). Also, the 
counts at the Huntington WWTP on June 27 and August 12 were 6,000 and 8,100 
org/100 ml, respectively. Additionally, on the high flow day, August 8, 
Strathmore WWTP had a count of 2000 org./lOO ml. Fecal coliform levels at WF08 
(near confluence of West Branch with main stem), on West Branch ranged between 
40-400 org./ 100 ml during the entire survey period, (the 400 coming on the 8/08 
high flow day) . It would definitely appear that there are higher fecal coliform 
counts following wet weather events . 



67 



Metals Concentrations [Tables 14-16A], and loadings [Table 23] are generally 
within U.S. EPA water quality criteria [Table 16B, Freshwater Metals Criteria 
for Aquatic Life Protection] for copper, lead, zinc, aluminum, chromium, and 
cadmium. The only exception is slightly elevated aluminum levels, ranging fror» 
0.05-0.95 mg/1 throughout the survey period, (with an average of 0.40 mg/1). 
Other metals were at, or near, minimum detection limits. 

Microtox"* Test Sampling and Results [Tables 17-18] A water quality survey was 
conducted on the lower portion of the Westfield River on June 27, 1990. Three 
instream samples were collected for subsequent toxicity analyses using the 
Microtox m toxicity analyzer. A brief description of the instream sampling 
locations is given below: 

WF12: Westfield River, off Route 20, Russell 

WF22: Westfield River, Frog Hole, Route 20, Westfield 

WF25: Westfield River, Route 5 Bridge, West Springfield 

Additional sampling information is given in Table 17. Microtox"* results are 
located in Table 18. 

Comments - no acute instream toxicity was detected in the WF12 sample. The 5- 
minute EC 50 was 100% sample, and both the 15 and 30-minute EC 50 s were reported 
as spurious. Only minor incipient toxicity (5-minute EC 10 = 52% sample) was 
detected. Additional information is presented in Figure 1. 

The Microtox"* toxicity analysis of the WF22 sample indicated an extremely toxic 
sample. The EC so s for 5, 15 and 30 minutes were all <5.6% sample. A duplicated 
Microtox*" analysis also resulted in EC 50 s <5.6% sample and warrants consideration 
for additional sampling. 

No instream toxicity was detected in the WF2 5 sample. The 5, 15 and 30-minute 
EC 50 s were reported as spurious; the same was true for the EC 10 s and EC 20 s . 

It was recommended that Microtox"* sampling be conducted at the following stations 
in an attempt to bracket possible sources of instream toxicity in the Westfield 
River : 

WF12: Westfield River, off Route 20, Russell 
WF16: Little River, Horton's Bridge, Westfield 
WF19: Little River, off South Meadow Road, Westfield 
WF22: Westfield River, Frog Hole, Route 20, Westfield 

Westfield River, just above confluence with Little River 

On July 11, 1990, six instream grab samples were collected from the Westfield 
and Little Rivers in order to follow up on the Microtox"* analysis of the sample 
collected on June 27, 1990 from Station WF22, which indicated an extremely toxic 
sample. The analysis of WF22 indicated a non-toxic sample, since the 5, 15 and 
30-minute EC 5 »s were reported as spurious. The source of toxicity from the 
previous sample could be attributed to either a transient slug or bottle/sample 
contamination prior to analysis, but the precise source of toxicity is ambiguous 
at this point. The remaining five samples were not run due to complications with 
the Microtox 1 " analyzer. 

On August 8, 1990, four instream grab samples were taken from the Westfield River 
at Stations WF12, 19, 22, and 2 5 and were analyzed for toxicity with the 
Microtox 1 " on August 9. Additionally, one instream grab sample from Station WF22 
and a prechlorinated effluent grab sample from the Westfield WWTP were collected 
on October 11, 1990. Both of the latter samples were analyzed for toxicity on 
October 12, 1990. 

Additional sampling information can be found in Table 17. Microtox"* results are 
located in Table 18. 



68 



None of the five samples tested from the westfield River nor the Westfield POTW 
prechlorinated effluent were found to cause toxicity to the Microtox"" bacterium, 
Photobacterium phosphoreum . All EC 10 s, 20s and 50s were either 100% sample or 
were reported as spurious (i.e.) the samples caused actual increases in light 
output of the bacteria compared to that of the controls). 

Spectrometry Analysis of Purqeable Orqanics 

Three stations WF12, 22, and 25 were sampled [Table 19] June 27, August 8, and 
September 12. No organics were detected, except at WF12, on 9/12, a methyl 
ethylketone level of 3.7 jug/1 was detected. 

Columbia Manufacturing Co. Discharge 

In the 1990 update study of water quality conditions in the Westfield River 
Basin, Columbia Manufacturing Co., of Westfield, a former discharger to the 
Little River, continues to be of concern as a discharger in the Westfield Basin. 
Recently, beginning about April 1990, the company tied into the Westfield Sewer 
System. This is creating concerns at the Westfield Wastewater Treatment Plant: 
in addition, under the City of Westfield pretreatment program, the Westfield WWTP 
has just issued additional guidelines/changes to the general conditions of the 
permit (9/11/90), and has, accordingly, asked the Company to submit a new 
schedule of compliance, which will incorporate the new guidelines and changes. 
As of the current date, the compliance schedule had not been received from the 
Company . 

During the summer of 199 0, a synoptic survey was conducted in the Westfield River 
Basin. Eleven stations were sampled, as well as four discharge permittees on 
June 27, August 8, and September 12. Additional Microtox™ sampling was conducted 
on August 16; and five discharge permittees (incl. Columbia Manufacturing), along 
with six river stations (for bacteria) were sampled on October 11. 

From the June 27 survey, one of the samples showed extreme toxicity. The water 
column sample was taken from the Frogs Hole Bridge, (Station WF22), in Westfield, 
which is roughly 3/4 mile downstream from the confluence of the Little and 
Westfield Rivers. An additional Microtox"* sample was taken from the same station 
on August 16, but the test results were negative. Although clear conclusions 
cannot be drawn from the one toxic sample (Aug. 8), it is possible that a slug 
of some sort of pollution existed in the river. There are several NPDES permit 
discharge sources immediately upstream of WF22: five metal finishing/plating 
companies, of which Columbia Manufacturing, on the Little River, is the largest 
(by far) discharger; and the (Westfield) WWTP. 

Through the assistance of Mr. Alan Pierce, Superintendent at the Westfield wwtp, 
the following records were made available: sample analysis (metals/organics) 
of influent and effluent from Westfield WWTP, sludge samples from Westfield WWTP, 
sample analysis (metals/organics) of Columbia Manufacturing, from combined sewer 
line leaving the Company, and Columbia's monthly self monitoring report for 1989. 

Sampling dates conducted by Westfield WWTP staff included the following: 
Westfield WWTP - 12/06/89, 6/6/90, 7/17/90 - 7/20/90, 7/31/90-8/1/90, 8/7/90- 
8/10/90; Westfield WWTP Sludge - 12/4/89, 12/14/89; Columbia Manufacturing Co . - 
10/21/89-10/27/89. 

The laboratory results, (Tighe & Bond, Inc.), indicates a very highly elevated 
total chromium level of 14 mg/1 in a Columbia composite sample on 10/21/89. 
Columbia's average daily discharge permit limit for total chromium is 1.5 mg/1, 
and the max daily is 2.00 mg/1. The 14 mg/1 reading on 10/21/89 is clearly a 
permit violation. In addition, the Columbia composite samples on 10/25/89- 
10/27/89 are close to violation levels (1.5-2.0 mg/1). 

There were no lab tests done on the Westfield WWTP influent or effluent, in or 
around any of these dates, to verify the existence of elevated total chromium 
levels. Influent composites 8/7-8/10/90 showed elevated total chromium levels 



69 



(0.84-1.5 mg/1) , and effluent composites on 7/19-7/2 0/9 are elevated (1.8 mg/1) . 
Of particular note, from the data, is the very high total cyanide levels (2.6- 
4.7 mg/1) from raw and final grab samples (6/6/90) at the WWTP. 

Mr. Pierce indicated that there are documented chemical and biological process 
operational problems in the^ Westfield WWTP that conform to several of the dates 
where elevated levels of Cr v0 and Cn toC were detected in the plant. This has been 
particularly true since April 1990, when Columbia Manufacturing tied their 
discharge into the sewer lines. He claims that there have been more instances 
since April, 1990, where WWTP operating problems have occurred. Mr. Pierce, as 
well as the pretreatment coordinator at the WWTP think that the discharge from 
Columbia is the prime source of the difficulties occurring at the plant. A case 
in point was on October 11, 1990, when plant personnel noted for several hours 
that the influent color was a dark green color, and that in the subsequent 24- 
36 hours there were considerable disruptions to normal plant chemical/biological 
operations. Unfortunately, samples for lab analysis were not taken due to 
current local budgetary restrictions. However, the city is currently trying to 
elicit a new contract for lab services which would be much closer, 
geographically, and costing less than the present contractor arrangement. 
Hopefully, this would allow for more frequent sampling and analysis, to better 
document the frequently occurring problems. 

Discussion with Mr. Timothy McElroy of the DEP, Western Regional Office, 
indicated that over the past several years. The office had been actively 
involved with Columbia Manufacturing. Numerous site visits have been made by 
the Western DEP Office, with concerns expressed over the treatment processes 
there, as well as the discharge itself. Specifically, the company has repeatedly 
dumped metal processing rinse water, without pretreatment, directly into the 
Little River. Also, there is concern about residuals creating potential 
hazardous waste problems at the company. 

Apparently, DEP's involvement convinced EPA officials in the Region I, and 
Headquarters Offices, to take a more active role in the overall problems at 
Columbia Manufacturing. EPA is currently involved in a major litigation case 
involving the company. 

It is recommended that Westfield WWTP staff continue to monitor influent/effluent 
at the plant, as well as the sewer line leaving Columbia. Increased funding 
should be requested from the Westfield, Board of Public Works, specifically for 
■more frequent sampling and lab analysis at the WWTP and Columbia, in order to 
more closely document the sources of operational problems at the WWTP. 

WESTFIELD RIVER 

WATER QUALITY CHANGES, COMPARISON WITH 19 85 DATA 

Tables 23-26; Figures 12-14 represent a compilation of loadings data from the 
1985 and 1990 Westfield surveys. Representative flows, with estimated mass 
loadings, or averaged mass loadings, in each parameter are listed in the tables 
for the survey dates during those particular years. For the 1985 survey (Table 
24) flows and respective loadings are averaged for the two survey dates. In 
comparing loadings between the two surveys, only two of the three 199 survey 
dates are used (6/27, 9/12). The other 1990 survey date, 8/8, consisted of 
unusually high flows and loadings, which are not comparable to the lower flows 
and loadings on other survey dates in either the 1985 or 1990 surveys. 

Table 23 shows flows, as well as loadings for all parameters on all the 1990 
survey dates both for river stations as well as dischargers. Table 24 summarizes 
flows and existing loadings for the 19 85 survey for the same stations and 
dischargers. Table 25 compares the average mg/1 concentrations in the water 
column at various stations between the 1985 and 1990 surveys. Table 26 
summarizes and compares flows and loadings at various stations between the 19 85 
and 1990 surveys. Tables 27(a)-(e) compares 1985 with 1990 effluent parameter 



70 






concentrations (mg/1) of five major dischargers monitored along the Westfield 
and Little Rivers. Figures 8, 9, and 11 graphically show the comparison between 
the 1985 and 1990 average concentrations of D.O., BOD 5 , TKN in the water column; 
Figure 10 shows comparison between the 1985 and 1990 surveys with fecal coliform 
counts; and Figures 12-14 show the comparison of loadings between 1985 and 1990 
surveys for BOD 5 , TKN, and suspended solids. 

The overall comparison would indicate that average water quality conditions 
throughout the basin have not significantly changed between 1985 and 1990. While 
numerous variations in water column concentrations and loadings between the two 
survey years are evidenced, the overall picture in the basin has not really 
changed in five years. The entire river basin met water quality standards for 
dissolved oxygen, and all except the lower 5 mile portion met for fecal coliform. 
It would seem that fecal coliform levels generally have lowered since 1985, 
except during wet weather flows, e.g., 8/8/90, where there continues to be 
violations throughout the main stem. 

On the main stem between 1985 and 1990 BOD 5 loadings decreased an average of 1% 
; ammonia-nitrogen decreased an average of 1%; nitrate-nitrogen increased nearly 
45%; TKN decreased 39%; total phosphorus decreased an average of 13%; suspended 
solids decreased an average of 12%; fecal coliform counts decreased an average 
of 44%; chloride decreased an average of 13%; iron decreased 11%; aluminum 
increased 276%; copper decreased 50%; zinc increased 21%; and cadmium and 
chromium were negligible. The most notable parameter change is the marked 
increase of aluminum loadings over the five year period, particularly in the 
WF10-WF14 portion of the river. 

As noted already, the above changes are based on days with fairly normal flows 
(230-343 cfs) along the main stem during the 1985 and 1990 basin studies. 
However, post wet weather flows (>1" rainfall), present a different story. Fecal 
coliform counts, plus loadings for the 8/8/90 wet weather day (Table 23) are very 
high. The average loadings on 8/8/90 for each station along the WF10 - WF25 main 
stem portion include (with flows ranging from2125-2425 cfs): BOD 5 62,850 
lbs/day; Suspended solids 164,013 lbs/day; TKN 8,470 lbs/day; Ammonia-Nitrogen 
1,170 lbs/day; Nitrate-Nitrogen 6,228 lbs/day; Total Phosphorus 1,530 lbs/day; 
Fecal Coliform count 10,680/100 ml; Aluminum 3,167 lbs/day; Copper 1,013 lbs/day; 
Zinc 362 lbs/day; Lead 141 lbs/day; Chromium 85 lbs/day; Cadmium <43 lbs/day. 
The combined 4 major dischargers contribute only a very small portion of these 
loadings; it is therefore assumed that a combination of other point source 
dischargers, higher erosion rates, nonpoint sources - storm water runoff during 
significant rainfall, runoff events triggers the vast increases in all loadings 
and fecal coliform counts. 

Wastewater Treatment Plant Analysis 

Tables 27(a)-(e) detail, and Tables 28(a)-(e) summarize all data collected in 
1985 and 1990 for 5 major dischargers into the Westfield main stem, obviously, 
the greatest problem with four of the dischargers in 1990 is high effluent BOD 5 
levels (Huntington WWTP, Russell WWTP, Strathmore Paper Co. , and Westfield WWTP) . 
The average BOD 5 level for the four dischargers survey days (6/27, 8/8/, 9/12, 
10/10) exceeded the maximum daily allowable level in the permit, (50 mg/1) for 
municipal WWTP's 2050 lbs/day at strathmore). All these plants performed well 
within their average daily BOD 5 permit limit in 1985 (30 mg/1 for municipal 
WWTP's, 1300 lbs/day for Strathmore). However, in 1990 there were quite a few 
violations of the BOD 5 limit. Huntington was in violation on 6/27; Russell on 
6/27, 8/8; Strathmore on 6/27, 9/12; and westfield on 6/27. With respect to 
total suspended solids, all the plants generally met daily average limits, except 
for the Russell WWTP. 

All plants generally met Fecal Coliform count limits. Total Phosphorus levels 
seemed fairly low at all the plants (2.3-4.0 mg/1). Phosphorus loadings ranged 
from 1.5-3.8 lbs/day at Huntington WWTP, 0.90-2.8 lbs/day at Russell WWTP, and 



71 



36-72 lbs/day at the Westfield WWTP. Nitrogen levels (TKN; Ammonia-N; Nitrogen- 
N), at both the Huntington and the Westfield WWTPs saw improvements since 1985, 
however, the Russell WWTP witnessed higher levels in 1990. Metals concentrations 
were not significant, except for the problems reported earlier in regards to 
Columbia Manufacturing tie-in to the Westfield WWTP. 

In addition to the five dischargers sampled during the 1990 Westfield River 
Survey, there are at least 13 other permitted dischargers along the mainstem and 
Little River Tributary. Four of these dischargers are paper companies, four are 
metal finishing companies, two are hospitals, and three are public entities. 
Along with the earlier described problems at Columbia Manufacturing Co., there 
have been reported violations at the Westfield River Paper Co. plant upstream 
in Russell. Additionally, strathmore Paper Co. has requested in a recent renewal 
permit application, that it be allowed a 20% increase in its daily BOD 5 limit 
(from 1300 lbs/day to 1560 lbs /day ) . 

It should be noted that with the new advanced WWTP coming on-line in Russell by 
June 1991, the water quality downstream will be enhanced somewhat. This should 
create an improvement (i.e. lowering) of at least 5% in BOD 5 , nutrient, and 
solids loadings in the river just downstream from the discharge. 



72 



THE BEGINNINGS OF LOCAL. STATE. AND FEDERAL PARTNERSHIP 

As with all other water quality improvement successes achieved along specific 
American waterways, cleaning up the Westfield River didn't happen by itself. 
It took the combined efforts of the Massachusetts DWPC, which set water quality 
standards, issued permits to municipal and industrial dischargers, and monitored 
improvements along these waters - and the federal U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), which awarded funds to construct sewage treatment plants, awarded 
other funds to study and clean up pollution from nonpoint sources, and issued 
discharge permits concurrently with the state. 

Over and above these state and federal actions, however, the dedicated activist 
efforts of the Westfield River Watershed Association provided the impetus to 
restore this scenic and highly utilized river. 

By the mid-1960 's, the Westfield River Watershed Association had formed a 
powerful and increasingly vocal coalition of private citizens, local civic 
leaders, pro-environmental industrial representatives, and political and 
legislative leaders at the highest state level. As the 1960 's passed into the 
1970 's, and as the ripple effect of the Association's environmental activism 
merged into a nationwide ground swell, other citizen groups around the country 
also fought to restore America's waterways. 

Their efforts, and those of others around the country, were repaid on October 
1, 1972, when Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments 
of 1972 which overhauled previous water quality legislation and began the most 
comprehensive program of water pollution control in the nation's history by 
mandating a sweeping federal and state effort to clean up the country's rivers 
and lakes . 

State and Federal cleanup Actions 

Acting under the authority of Section 201 of the landmark Federal 1972 Water Act, 
the Massachusetts DWPC and the Westfield River Watershed Association conducted 
public hearings to determine the type of waste treatment facilities needed by 
several towns and cities along the Westfield River, and to make the local public 
aware of available funding. 

Shortly after, these communities hired engineering consultants to draw up 
pollution abatement plans for state approval. Local hearings were then held to 
vote approval of final state-approved water pollution abatement plans. 

Before the 1972 Water Act was passed, the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Administration (FWPCA), the predecessor agency to the EPA, had awarded the City 
of Westfield $2.3 million in 1970 to construct a conventional activated sludge 
secondary treatment plant. Later, between 1977 and 1979, the EPA awarded the 
city an additional $257,000 to construct pipelines to separate stormwater and 
sanitary discharges to the treatment plant. On line in 1973, the city of 
Westfield 's secondary treatment facility provides treatment for 4.0 million 
gallons per day of the city's municipal and industrial wastes, and removes 85 
to 90 percent of the BOD and suspended solids in its discharges. 

In 1970, the FWPCA awarded the Town of West Springfield $418,000 to construct 
an interceptor sewer system and a force main. In 1971, the EPA awarded the town 
$2.9 million to construct an additional interceptor sewer system and force main, 
and a pumping station. All of these facilities were tied in to the town's 
treatment plant and made operational by 1973. Finally, in 1979, the EPA awarded 
West Springfield $2.1 million to construct pipelines to separate stormwater and 
sanitary discharges to the waste treatment plant. These additional facilities 
were put on line in the early 1980 's and additional CSO planning work was 
supposed to commence by 1990. 



73 



In 1973, the EPA awarded the City of Springfield $39 million to upgrade its 
primary treatment plant to secondary status, and also construct a sewer 
interceptor system. Known as the Bondi Island Regional Treatment Plant, this 
conventional secondary facility - on line in 1977 - provides treatment for 67 
million gallons per day of municipal and industrial wastes, removes 96 percent 
of the BOD and 94 percent of the suspended solids in its discharges, and serves 
the communities of Springfield, West Springfield, Agawam, Longmeadow, East 
Longmeadow and Ludlow. 

In addition, in 1975 and 1977, the EPA awarded the City of Agawam a total of $2 
million to construct interceptor sewer systems, pumping stations, and force 
mains. All of these ancillary waste treatment facilities were tied into the 
Bondi Island Plant and were operational by the end of 1979. 

Finally, in mid-1977 the EPA awarded the Town of Huntington $970,000 to construct 
an activated sludge secondary treatment plant with extended aeration. On line 
in 197 8, this new plant provides treatment for 0.2 million gallons per day of 
municipal wastes, and removes 85 percent of the BOD and suspended solids in its 
discharges. 

Section 402 of the Federal 1972 Water Act established the National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Implemented by the EPA and the states, 
this system defines the requirements for permits to discharge into the nation's 
waters. 

Acting under this authority, the DWPC identified each industrial polluter along 
the westf ield and recommended appropriate cleanup actions . 

Acting under the authority of Section 402, between 1974 and 1976 the EPA and the 
DWPC issued the first discharge permits under the NPDES program to seven major 
industrial and two major municipal dischargers, and to four minor industrial and 
three minor municipal dischargers along the Westf ield River. 

Industry responded, as three of the four paper mills along the main stem 
constructed in-house facilities to treat their wastewater before discharging to 
the river. The fourth paper mill constructed storage lagoons to settle suspended 
solids, neutralization facilities to remove dye wastes, and recycling equipment 
to treat process wastes with no direct discharge to the Westf ield River. 

In addition, the abrasives manufacturer constructed equipment to recycle its 
wastes with no direct discharge to the river, the metal-finishing plant 
constructed an in-house metals removal facility, and the radiator plant provided 
phosphorus removal equipment. 

The 1980 's saw a construction grant awarded to the Town of Russell to build a 
new secondary plant. Construction began in 1988 and was expected to be complete 
by 199 0. The Division continued periodic monitoring of the Huntington and 
westf ield Municipal Plants, as well as the industrial permittees. 

Restored Water Uses Along the Westfield River 

As a direct result of combined regional, state and federal cleanup actions, 
monitoring studies conducted by the Massachusetts DWPC along the Westfield River 
main stem during the late 1970 's showed that water quality had improved markedly 
over a few short years. 

By 1978, the overall BOD loading in these waters had dropped from the 12,000 
pounds per day load recorded in 1972 to 4000 pounds per day in 1978. This is 
an impressive 66 percent reduction achieved between 1972 and 1978. Loadings in 
1985 averaged about 4000 pounds per day, and the 1990 survey averaged about 3900 
pounds per day. 

Moreover, DWPC monitoring studies conducted in 1978 at the City of Westfield 
indicated a fecal coliform bacteria count of only 16 organisms per 100 ml, a 



74 



remarkable 99.6 percent reduction of bacterial pollution from the 430,000 
organism per 100 ml count recorded at the same location only six years before. 
"This tremendous improvement is indicative of fecal coliform reductions achieved 
along the entire main stem by 1978," the DWPC spokesman emphasized. 

With water quality visibly improving along this New England stream, fish kills 
became a thing of the past and bloodworms no longer infested the lower main stem. 
Encouraged by the return of sportfish to these waters, anglers returned to the 
main stem to haul in sizeable catches of smallmouth bass, and rainbow and brown 
trout, which the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and wildlife began 
restocking along this segment in 1977. Boaters, canoers, and kayak enthusiasts 
also appeared in large numbers, as water quality conditions no longer offended 
local residents or degraded the appearance of the shoreline. 

Robinson State Park, with its hiking and bicycle trains, is also a haven for 
swimmers and picnickers. While nuisance odors from paper mill sludge no longer 
plague visitors, there are sporadic coliform problems from nonpoint source 
pollution in the City of westfield. "We are addressing this situation," says 
the Lower Pioneer Valley Regional Planning Commission, "and anticipate renewed 
swimming and fishing in and along the park in the near future." 

The Westfield River Meeting Water Quality Standards 

Back in 1966, the Massachusetts Legislature had enacted Section 27, chapter 21, 
General Laws of Massachusetts. Known as the Massachusetts Clean Waters Act, this 
legislation: "Adopts standards of water quality which shall be applicable to 
the various waters, or portions of waters, of the Commonwealth." 

Under this authority, in 1967 the DWPC developed water quality standards, 
including classifications, for all of Massachusetts' waterways. The DWPC then 
classified the westfield River as a class B waterway (See Figure 3) - suitable 
for water contact recreation, an excellent fish and wildlife habitat, and 
acceptable for public water supply after treatment and disinfection - and 
mandated that this quality standard be achieved along the entire Westfield River. 

The following segment-by-segment review of the Westfield River conducted by the 
DWPC in 1978, and again in 1980, 1985, and 1990 indicates how water quality had 
improved in terms of conventional pollutant cleanup. 

- Main Stem 

In 1978, the main stem was no longer degraded by paper mill wastes. During 
that year, the main stem from Huntington to the City of Westfield achieved 
Class B status. From the City of Westfield to its mouth at the Connecticut 
River, the main stem achieved Class C status, suitable for recreational 
boating and secondary water contact recreation and for certain agricultural 
and industrial uses. A class C waterway is also a suitable habitat for 
fish and wildlife indigenous to the region. By 199 0, only the last 8 miles 
from Agawam to the Connecticut River confluence remained at Class C status. 

"In 1980," says the DWPC, "seventy five percent of the main stem qualifies 
as a Class B waterway. The main bottleneck in 1978 had been combined 
sewers which discharged untreated wastes into the river at the City of 
Westfield. Since then, most of these combined sewers have been tied in 
to the local treatment plant." By 1990 this percentage increased slightly 
to 80%. 



75 



- East Branch 

In 1978, through 1990, the East Branch was a Class B waterway. 

- Middle Branch 

In 1978, and in 1980, the Middle Branch maintained Class A status above 
the Littleville Dam, and a class B rating below this location. class A 
waters are designated for use as sources of public water supply, and are 
severely restricted for recreational use. 

- West Branch 

In 1978, and 1985, the West Branch achieved Class B status above the Town 
of Chester, but due to septic tank malfunctions which caused minor fecal 
coliform problems below Chester, a class C rating below Chester. 

In 1980, in spite of sporadic coliform violations, the entire West Branch 
is classified as a Class B waterway. Only one station was sampled in 1990, 
which was just upstream from the Huntington WWTP. This generally met the 
Class B standard for coliform and dissolved oxygen. 

- Little River 

In 197 8, the Little River from its source to the Cobble Mountain Reservoir 
achieved Class A status, and a Class C rating from the reservoir to its 
mouth on the Westfield River. 

In 1978, the last two river miles above the confluence with the Westfield 
River were experiencing fecal coliform bacteria violations from combined 
sewer overflows. In 19 80, these overflows were eliminated and this segment 
has fully met class B standards in the 1985 and 1990 surveys. 

Water Quality samples were collected from the Westfield River by the Technical 
Services Branch during the spring and summer of 19 85 and summer of 1990. Table 
3 summarizes by river segment, the use classification, status, and problems from 
analysis of 1985 results. Table 4 gives dissolved oxygen results from 1990 
survey. High concentrations of dissolved oxygen were maintained throughout the 
river. Values in the 1985 and 1990 surveys were mostly 8.0 mg/1 or above on the 
main stem and tributaries of the Westfield River. All samples exceeded the class 
B water quality standard for dissolved oxygen. 

Figure 4 shows the fecal coliform data for stations sampled on the westfield 
River in 1985. Figure 7 shows this data for stations sampled in 1990 survey. 
There were a number of violations of the fecal coliform standard of 200 organisms 
per 100 ml in both 1985 and 1990. The bacteria standard was violated more 
frequently and by a greater amount at the downstream stations, which are located 
in Westfield and Agawam and West Springfield. High bacteria concentrations were 
caused by urban runoff, combined sewer overflows (CSOs), and dry weather 
overflows in the two communities. The 1990 data indicated higher fecal coliform 
counts just after significant wet weather throughout the middle and lower portion 
of the Basin, such that Class B standards are not met for vast portions of the 
Basin. DEP, Construction Grants-funded activities have been occurring in these 
two communities which has resulted in some improvement in water quality in the 
lower portion of the Westfield River. The City of Westfield has already 
completed a sewer system rehabilitation project. Agawam has participated in a 
study of CSOs in seven (7) communities which discharge to the Connecticut River 
and its major tributaries. This study developed abatement strategies for CSOs. 



76 



Additionally, a cso pump station has been constructed in Agawam. There has been 
slight improvement between 19 85 and 1990 in fecal coliform counts in the lower 
portion of the Westfield, however, much of this still does not meet Class B 
standards . 

Plots of data of concentrations of BOD 5 , suspended solids, ammonia-nitrogen, and 
total-phosphorus collected in the 1985 and 1990 surveys [Figure 8-14] showed 
similar trends. Pollutant concentrations were lower in the uppermost reaches 
of the river, reflecting very good water quality. Pollutant concentrations 
increased at the downstream stations, due to greater pollutant loadings from the 
drainage basin. The number of wastewater treatment facilities and the size of 
these plants increased in downstream communities, where the watershed has higher 
populations. In the middle portion of the river, water quality problems were 
caused by failing on-site disposal systems and untreated discharges. 

The trends of data between 1985 and 1990 in Figures 8-14 demonstrate only a very 
slight improvement, if any, in overall conditions. BOD and D.O. chemistries 
are about the same. Fecal coliform counts are lower in the Lower Westfield 
portion. TKN is slightly lower in 199 throughout the basin. BOD loadings were 
about the same, NH 3 -N loadings were somewhat less, and suspended solids loadings 
were about the same. 

The most significant conclusions remained that the very lower portion of the 
Westfield River (Agawam, West Springfield) did not meet Class B water quality 
standards for fecal coliform. Several people encountered during the 1990 survey 
(as well as the 19 85 survey) complained about the lack of primary recreation 
opportunities, and the poor aesthetic quality of the water. On these scores, 
there has not been much change over five years . 



77 



J 



RECOMMENDATIONS 

There appears to be at least some problems with a number of larger permittees 
with meeting their BOD permit limits, plus at least one example of inadequate 
pretreatment into a municipal WWTP. Since the Department will be embarking on 
increased efforts in permit compliance, water quality in the Westfield River 
mainstem would be enhanced with future DEP compliance activity in that basin 
during 1991-1992. Special attention should be given to the Huntington, Russell, 
and Westfield WWTP's, as well as Strathmore Co., Westfield Paper Co., (Russell), 
and Columbia Manufacturing Co., (Westfield). Additionally, DMR's of the other 
twelve permittees should be examined, with compliance contact checks made, as 
appropriate. 

It is recommended that Strathmore Co. not be granted its request for a 2 0% 
increase in BODc loadings. They already contribute, with an average permit BOD 
limit of 1050 lbs/day, one-third of the existing BOD 5 load to the river at that 
point. A recent re-study of their wasteload allocation would indicate that 
granting the strathmore request to increase the loading to 1300 lbs/day, would 
result in serious pollution problems downstream when the flow is at or near 7Q10 
low flow conditions . 

As for the West Branch Tributary, 1990 results at WF08 would indicate a 
continuation of significant BOD 5 and nitrogen loadings in that portion of the 
river basin. This particular synoptic study did not get into detailed sampling 
and analysis of the entire West Branch and its problems. The 19 85 report did 
indicate possible discharge as well as nonpoint source problems in the Chester 
portion of the west Branch. The Chester, and surrounding areas, should consider 
the Department's Non-Point Source Best Management Practices Program, for possibly 
funding a non-point source control project in the region. 

The land use along the Westfield River from the Westfield River town line to the 
Connecticut River Confluence is essentially urban. In 1985, the portion from 
WF14 to WF25, (river mile 17.3 to 0.4), showed consistent violations of Fecal 
coliform counts (Table 25), whereas in 1990, only the WF23-WF25 (river mile 7.6 
to 0.4) portion nearest the confluence showed violations, (except for violations 
all along the mainstem portion during wet weather). Between 1985 and 1990 
nutrient parameters on the lower portion (WF14 - WF25) remained essentially the 
same. 

The 19 85 report suggested that both dry and wet weather combined sewer overflows, 
in the river mile 17.3 to 0.4 portion of the Westfield, were principal 
contributors to fecal coliform, and nutrient loadings in this portion of the 
river. Agawam has a major CSO project in the Step III phase of construction, 
which is a forced pump station which will help to alleviate overflows in that 
area. As of this writing, West Springfield has no such plans which have advanced 
to this stage. It is highly recommended that special priority be given to fund 
at least the Phase I and II parts of a CSO plan of study for the West Springfield 
portion of the Westfield. CSO Construction is needed, which will alleviate fecal 
coliform counts and nutrient loadings in the last three miles of the Lower 
Westfield River. 

It is highly recommended that the Bureau of Municipal Facilities give strong 
consideration for future CSO proposals on the Lower Westfield, including the use 
of planning monies, if available, for the communities of Agawam and West 
Springfield. Additionally, compliance work should be a top priority at the 
bigger NPDES facilities: Westfield WWTP, Columbia Manufacturing, Strathmore 
Paper Co., and Westfield Paper Co. 



78